SuperSite Blog

The thing is, how else can they (creatively) make a way for users to launch their apps? Go back to Program Manager, or MS-DOS Executive?

I would prefer a Start Menu-less interface in which the taskbar is L-shaped. By that, I mean that it runs along the bottom but also along the left-hand side. Maybe the bottom edge could be for running programs while the left-hand edge could be for program shortcuts, negating the need for a popup Start Menu.

With the prevalence these days of widescreen monitors, most people will not miss the screen real-estate taken up by a left-hand taskbar.

I have been using a tool called True Launch Bar for a few years now.  And it is working great in 7 as well.  It is, essentially a beefed up quick launch bar replacement.  But instead of one icon, one program, you can create menus of items.  Everything I need on a daily basis is, essentially, 2 clicks away.  Something like this as a start menu replacement would work great for me.  The problem might be in the initial configuration for novice users.  Where to place items without, eventually, just taking up all of the task bar with launch icons.

"The thing is, how else can they (creatively) make a way for users to launch their apps? Go back to Program Manager, or MS-DOS Executive?"

Exactly!

The VERY FIRST thing I do in Mac OS X is make a Stack for the applications folder!

You can't have ALL your applications in a bar (or a dock). Well, you could just launch applications by searching for them via Desktop Search (or Spotlight), but some users prefer using only the mouse.

It's true, I use the start menu only for Desktop Search, nothing else. But, as I said, some users still prefer to click through folders in order to launch applications.

What does that mean? If Microsoft removed the start menu, the Taskbar would become more and more like a Dock.

And flankly, the Dock sucks. Totally. The Superbar is just a much nicer (in fact, VERY much nicer) concept for window management, than just having Expose.

It's a lot of fun to work with the new Superbar. It makes working fast, easy/simple and productive. This concept is way ahead of the dock (though I like using OS X, but the dock annoys me).

OK, the Superbar is still not perfect. But it's far more close to perfect than the Dock concept and they should really leave it the way it is!

There's a reason for the start menu! It's the same reason that makes  creating an application stack my first action in OS X.

I like the idea of keeping the start menu for infrequently used programs.

For example, Scheduled tasks in Windows.  I don't use it but once when I set up Sync Toy (another rarely 'used' program) but I like that I can get to it if I need to.

For anything I used regularly I pin it to the start menu, if it's something I use a LOT like say, Firefox, I put it in the quick launch.

I don't really like the idea of losing it completely because I hate having a zillion icons on my task bar.  I do like the approach we've seen in Vista and Win 7 though where it's not really used as a hierarchy of menus.  that has always seemed stupid and cumbersome.  Even in Windows 98, I'd pin a folder of shortcuts to my most used programs to my task bar effectively creating a second start menu of my "pinned" items.

@Paul

"Why the heck is "Aero Peek" down at the right end of the taskbar (it used to be called Show Desktop and was right next to the Start button)? That should be the Recycle Bin."

The reason it's at the far right lower corner, is that it's a place that you can mouse to very very quickly. It is a very large effective target.

The recycle bin doesn't need to be accessed particularly often, so that doesn't need to be placed in a location such as that.

That's not windows fandoyism, that's just logic (finally) dictating some windows design principles.

I really hope they don't dump the Start Menu, having the Trash icon in the Dock on OS X is a huge annoyance to me (particularly as I set the Dock to hidden as I have a smaller screen resolution and it gets annoying having the Dock obscure the horizontal scroll on InDesign or Word/Excel)

I think the current Show Desktop, a large button on the right of the taskbar is good, nice big target.

In fact, I'd say part of the reason I work faster in Windows than Mac OS X is the start menu, for me it seems more logical and better use of screen estate than the OS X paradigm.

And this isn't because I'm a hold out, I run Vista on my desktop and love it. On smaller screens such as netbooks and older hardware, the start menu makes good use of screen estate without sapping too much space to display running apps effectively. If the start menu was removed, I'd end up with too many shortcuts to locations, the instant search etc. and before you know it, no space to properly show running apps.

If Microsoft removed the start menu forcibly with no option to add it back, that would be a bad mistake in my book.

What about search? How would a user search for files and/or program? In Windows XP all I have in the Quick Launch bar are Show Desktop, IE and WLM; every other program I open from the Start Menu.

Once I get Windows 7 though I think I'll pin more programs -- especially those that I use on a regular basis.

What about search? How would a user search for files and/or program? In Windows XP all I have in the Quick Launch bar are Show Desktop, IE and WLM; every other program I open from the Start Menu.

Once I get Windows 7 though I think I'll pin more programs -- especially those that I use on a regular basis.

you can pin the control panel to the taskbar... open control panel, then right click on the icon in the taskbar and select 'pin to taskbar'

@gorath:

"The reason it's at the far right lower corner, is that it's a place that you can mouse to very very quickly. It is a very large effective target"

this does work very well (and fast) with single screen monitors but it's not as quick when you have dual screen as the mouse pops over to the other screen, you have to be more accurate.  I still like it there though.

"I like the idea of keeping the start menu for infrequently used programs."

It's funny you should say that.  Since Windows XP, that's exactly the opposite of what the new Start Menu UI was designed for.  The idea was to get icons off the desktop, and to not necessitate the use of Quick Launch.

If we keep moving in a similar direction, the Start Menu will change into something different.

There's 3 main navigation areas (4 if you count the Shut Down button) of the current Windows 7 Start Menu.  You've got personal folder links, system links, and application links.  If you create an icon to replace the personal folder links, you could just link it to "Libraries", or "My Stuff" or whatever.  That one's easy.  System links can be gathered together.  Navigating the filesystem can be done using the Libraries link, but I would argue that having top-down filesystem access isn't a common requirement for most users.  I'd imagine that the functionality of all of the system management stuff, including Control Panel, could be pruned back, while still being incorporated as a single unifying console.  I could see it where the other options can just be incorporated into the already-Vista-like Control Panel for easy navigation to common options.  The text links under the main Control Panel categorical links should be dynamic based on usage though.  Finally, the application links could be deprecated to an "Infrequently used programs" icon.  That's pretty much a given.  Commonly used programs would already be on the Taskbar.

...speaking of dual screens, why can't the taskbar extend to both screens so i'd have the mother of all taskbars at the bottom of the screen with the clock on the far right (monitor 2) and the start button on the far left (monitor 1).

Come on people. This is the second story in a row where some 3rd party expressed an opinion and people treat it as though Bill Gates posted it on each of your screens personally.

Is the Start Menu really that much of an issue.

I do have shortcuts for all of my frequently used apps on the desktop, so I dont use it that ofter, but it still serves a useful purpose.

How about a more intuitive start menu? Instead of trying to put everything into one static list, how about start menu that revolves to reveal new options? Upon pressing the start orb with a mouse click or Windows Key, the default is frequently used programs. Either using a mouse/touch based gesture/click or keyboard shortcut, it revolves over to the All Programs menu. A third flip reveals the Documents, Pictures, Music, Games, Printers, Control Panel, and Printers Menu. I would believe that the Search Bar and Shutdown/Restart options would remain static on the screen. This way you can use one gesture/click/keyboard shortcut, to revolve the menu. Over time and practice it would become quite natural as a right click or the Alt/Tab shortcut to Windows users. Similar to the 3D flip, except its a simple revolve like flipping a card. Just a thought.

I have 2 feelings on the matter.

1.  With the start menu I would then need a way to "find" those applications that I don't use on a regular basis.  While I'd have the more used apps pinned to the doc... ahem... task bar, I would still need way to "find" those apps that I don't use every day...a... um... "Finder" if you will.

2.  While this may be the next evolutionary change for Windows, at what point should Microsoft worry that they need to find new ways to differentiate them self’s from Apple.  While this may be a logical direction to move to and I don’t believe in being different for difference sake, I can almost see the next Apple commercial now:

“… Why spend your money on a Mac Clone (ie Windows) when you can get the real thing….”

Just my 2 cents....

@mike

Why do you ALWAYS have to be negative? There is an interesting and healthy debate taking place here for a change.

@all:

"Send Feedback"  (otherwise it won't be considered)

(!!!)

Dammit, you STILL can't have the taskbar cover two screens? dammit dammit dammit.

@mike:

I'd imagine there's at least some devs working on potential UI concepts for Windows 8 at Microsoft right now.

Do you think it's going to have a similar appearance to Vista, but with a minorly-refined approach, or something completely way off?  MAJOR release?  Or "major" (ala Windows 7) release?

Hmm

Am I being negative? Nah

Do I dislike healthy debate? Nah

Do I think that for two days people have treated ideas from third parties and acted as though it was some secret plan out of Redmond? Yeah

Discussing the future of MP3 players is an interesting topic. BUT Pretending that speculation from a writer in the UK is a secret sign of Microsoft's plans for an entire division of the company is just silly. It's just a writer doing a good job of getting eyeballs and a bad job of actual reporting.

Discussing UI ideas is also interesting BUT Pretending that a blogger's ideas of what he'd like to see changed in the Windows UI is actually some mysterious hint dropped about some secret long term plans that  Microsoft has for Windows 8 or 9 is also silly. It's just a guy spitballing some ideas of how he'd change the UI.

"Dammit, you STILL can't have the taskbar cover two screens? dammit dammit dammit."

It's a complicated process to do that though.  You have to address the issue where users with different-sized screens running different resolutions have UX problems where moving the mouse off of one screen has to lock to a similar position on the next screen.  It's a jarring experience.

My advice:  move the taskbar to the middle edge (vertical position), between the two screens.  I know many clients that do this already, and Drag-and-dropping windows works well for them.

There's also a 3rd-party program that also has an option that puts a little arrow beside the minimize button to allow you to use a single click to move windows from one screen to another without dragging.  I don't remember the name of it though.

"There's a reason for the start menu! It's the same reason that makes  creating an application stack my first action in OS X."

An application stack is fine, it you like it. It's better than the hideous practice of littering a Windows desktop with shortcut icons. That's one of the cosmetic things about Windows that I can

Best of all though, if you're on a Mac is to use Spotlight, Launchbar or Butler as an app launcher. This isn't ideal for everything, but for fast (really fast) access to the things you use a lot, this solution can't be beat. For access to everything, just put your applications folder in the dock.

A big omission in OS X 10.5 is that stacks can be made from folders, but not Smart folders. That is, I can't create a Smart Folder of, say, every file I've accessed today and put that in the dock to become a popup list. This would be a wonderful thing, on OSX or Win 7.

@waethorn

how hard can it be to only enable the dual screen option if the resolution on both monitors is the same... or even more restricively if the monitors are the same model.  

i personally would use it every day as i am sat in front of two screen right now (both screens are the same model & res.).

And to answer Mike Halsey's question (and Paul's implied one) of " I’m looking at the Start Button in Windows 7 now and wondering when I’m ever going to press it."

The same times you would in Windows XP or Windows Vista if you had your favorite apps in a "Quick Launch" toolbar.

The Windows 7 changes HOW you interact with the Taskbar but doesn't change the actual targets located there.

In several previous generations of Windows  you had running tasks in one group on the Taskbar and favorite apps in another group on the Quick Launch.

In Windows 7 you have both running tasks and favorite apps in the SAME group on  the Taskbar.

But in both cases the same things are on the Taskbar - Running apps and Favorite shortcuts.

So, my question back is why would you use the Start menu any more or less?

And, if you've read Tim Sneath's blog post "The Bumper List of Windows 7 Secrets", you can even put the Quick Launch bar back in the Windows 7 UI in case you want two groups.

I'm not sure why you would, but you can.

(Tim's posting is at blogs.msdn.com/.../the-bumper-list-of-windows-7-secrets.aspx and if you want to keep reading tea leaves, at least Tim is both inside the Windows team and British)

The Start Menu should go away, but it probably won't for backward compatibility.

Count the clicks. Less clicks == better.

In OS X, the Dock is full of what Apple thinks are the most likely Applications the user would launch, including System Preferences (i.e. Control Panel). 1 click to launch all your most frequently used applications. If you need to get to your Documents, Movies, Music, Hard Drives, or other Applications, you click on the Finder, then the link (2 clicks). So to launch an Application that is not on your Dock, here are the clicks:

1. Click Finder

2. Click Applications

3. Double-click the application you want.

In Windows if you have a Program that isn't on the taskbar, here are the clicks:

1. Click Start Menu

2. If it's pinned to your Start Menu, click the Program (2 clicks, all these should be on the taskbar)

2a. If not, click All Programs

3. Click Program

3a. If in folder, click folder (recursive)

4. Click Program

In just this one example, you can easily replace Start Menu with Windows Explorer in Win 7 with a Programs library that flattens the list of Programs and have nearly the same experience, with some improvements. Maximize-able window for one, so you see more Programs at once.

What's left for the Start Menu to do? You don't need Computer, Documents, Music, Movies, etc. because that's all in Windows Explorer with the same number of clicks as with the Start Menu. Control Panel, Help and Support, and Power Options. Not much, it might be hard to completely eliminate because Windows has one system wide bar for everything, OS X has two, one thin (aka menu bar) and the other wider (aka Dock) for high frequency targets. Power options can be a dialog that pops up when the machine physical power button is pressed, just like in OS X. Help and Support can easily be in WIndows Explorer with just a few tweaks.

It's doable, but I still don't think Microsoft will do it because then as gumby74 said, the UI would be really close to just being an OS X clone. But Microsoft should do one thing MIke Halsey said, make Control Panel pinnable, and put it there by default. I also suggest loading up the taskbar with a few more things to suggest to the user that the taskbar should be full. Paint, Getting Started, problem with the lack of built-in programs now is that the amount of high use stuff included is pretty bare, and those two examples were stretches.

@murdocdv

i have control panel, calc, notepad, sticky's, ie8, explorer, media player in my taskbar..they are all default progs.  so there is plenty to put in from scratch.

(plus i have word, excel, onenote, clone, anydvd, and a couple of other non-default ones).

"So, my question back is why would you use the Start menu any more or less?"

I don't use the Quick Launch bar in Vista (I find it wastes space), but if the icons for running programs can be stationary when the program is closed, I may switch to using that method in Windows 7.  Currently I use the MCU/MRU portion of the Start Menu - it adapts to my usage.

The Quick Launch contains only static icons though.  Is there a day when this becomes a dynamic set of launch icons by predicting usage by combining MCU/MRU usage though?  Leave that decision up to the UI team.  You can always drop them a line though - "Send Feedback".

Quick question:

[How] Can you enable large icons for taskbar button icons?

[How] Can you turn off text labels for taskbar buttons?

If I can mirror the Windows 7 experience, I'll see how I like continuing to use the Vista Start Menu while I test the Windows 7 taskbar shortcuts.

murdocdv

While having all your program launch icons in a single folder (as was done in Finder or Windows 3.0's Program Manager) is quick, it doesn't scale when you have a lot of programs. If you have more icons than can fit in a single screen with no scroll bars you lose the advantage.

@stimshady

I just pinned the Control Panel, its not on the right-click menu for control panel in the Start Menu, only when you are running it (in OS X they call this "Keep in Dock"). I didn't suggest Calc and Notepad because I didn't think they were high use, but Calc I reconsider on, my wife has the OS X Calculator in her Dock, even though Spotlight can do math.

i suppose it depends on where the machine is too... i imagine media centre would be useful at home more than the office, so maybe that should be in the taskbar as part of the Home Premium version.

I agree though, it would be nice to be able to right click on Control Panel from the Start Menu (i 'SentFeedback' about this to MS!!)

@mikegalos

OS X's /Applications is not totally flat, I was simplifying it slightly so I didn't bogged down in OS X's implementation and unification of Application launching and their visibility in the file system. By default OS X puts all the really infrequently used stuff in /Applications/Utilities (e.g. Disk Utility). Applications can create their own folders in /Applications (e.g. MS Office 2008, iWork) to group related apps, but few apps do that because their assets are inside the application bundle, which is a folder that is treated as a single object in OS X. An analogous situation would be a Win Explorer shell extension that hide folders in C:\Program Files\ behind the icon for the main exe in that folder. Of course you can see what's in a bundle with a right-click.

Browsing for Applications or Programs ( OS X or Win respectively) is nearly vestigial as well. Spotlight or Desktop Search handle scaling to large numbers of applications easily.

Am I the only one that immediately changed Windows 7's taskbar to be more like Vista (i.e. set it to combine when full and unpinned everything)?  I never used Quick Launch either.  I hate the mixing of running programs and application links.  I also don't like having lots of shortcuts on my desktop.  For me the start menu is ideal.  I pin my most used apps to that.  So what if it takes be two clicks to launch an app instead of one?  I prefer this to constantly having a cluttered screen.

@hereskilled:

"Am I the only one that immediately changed Windows 7's taskbar to be more like Vista "

Yes!!!!!! ;)

It's interesting to read your views on my article and a nice surprise on returning home from work.  :o)

I've submitted plenty of bugs and usability feedback to Microsoft through the beta programme and about 50% of them have involved the taskbar or start menu in some way.  I completely agree with Paul that this is a half-way-house between what Microsoft want and what Windows users are used to.

I've had feedback from Microsoft today telling me that things aren't really set to change re the taskbar in Windows 7, which is a shame because they're gonna come in for a lot of criticism for it I think when the OS finally launches.

I think Microsoft are too scared at this point to make such an enormous usability change.  At least with the new taskbar they'll be weaning users onto it over the next few years.

I do think it's an opportunity missed though to not add additional functionality to the taskbar to allow you to switch the start menu off.

murdocdv

Right. And once you get to a hierarchic menu of applications then the benefit of the folder starts disappearing. Hence Windows XP moving from having all program hierarchies in the default Startt Menu and moving them to All Programs.

Oh and another thing why is it nolonger possible to run Paint from Run?  This was my preferred way of running things like calc, notepad and paint quickly.  Before anyone mentions it I know I can acheive a similar affect using the search on the start menu, but I've found it can be slower because you either have to wait for the results to come up or risk miss-typing and getting something else.  For example if you do Windows+R and type notepda and hit enter, you'll get an error.  Pressing Enter will drop you back to the Run dialog where you can correct your error.  Pressing Windows and typing the same you get the Search Results in Indexed Locations screen.  Even if you correct the search to Notepad it still does't list Notepad (because it's not in an indexed location) so you end up closing it and repeating (although this time you're more likely to wait until the results are displayed before hitting enter).

windows+r +appname works here ok.

hereskilled

Windows+r

mspaint <enter>

@ Mikegalos

"While having all your program launch icons in a single folder (as was done in Finder or Windows 3.0's Program Manager) is quick, it doesn't scale when you have a lot of programs. If you have more icons than can fit in a single screen with no scroll bars you lose the advantage. "

I'd argue it stops scaling well even before that point. Having too much information on screen can make it harder to choose the right icon.

I guess the sweet spot would probably be 5 icons across x 5 icons down, or thereabouts.

@mikegalos - "This is the second story in a row where some 3rd party expressed an opinion and people treat it as though Bill Gates posted it on each of your screens personally."

I agree with your point regarding the Zune article...but I don't see where in this article or comments sections that people are treating it as if it came from Microsoft. I see Paule starting the article off as such, "Mike Halsey writes that Microsoft is very likely starting the process of removing the Start Menu from Windows in Windows 7. I think he's right." and I see people discussing why they favor either the removal of keeping of it...but nobody is saying that the ythink this came directly from Bill Bates or anybody at Microsoft. So, whats your point?

--tayme

gorath

No argument needed. I absolutely agree with you. A large number of icons in one UI panel hurts usability. No question.

The reason for my statement was that we were discussing click counts (a small part of measuring usabilty)

Wow...typos galore in my last post. If I was using a different browser, a bunch of them would have been caught for me...

--tayme

tayme

Even in the section you quoted the discussion isn't "Is there still a need for the Start Menu". The discussion is "Is Microsoft secretly getting rid of the Start Menu".

I have no problem with the former, but the latter is just silly.

QUOTE "I agree with your point regarding the Zune article...but I don't see where in this article or comments sections that people are treating it as if it came from Microsoft. I see Paule starting the article off as such, "Mike Halsey writes that Microsoft is very likely starting the process of removing the Start Menu from Windows in Windows 7. I think he's right." and I see people discussing why they favor either the removal of keeping of it...but nobody is saying that the ythink this came directly from Bill Bates or anybody at Microsoft. So, whats your point?"

I've got Steven Sinofsky as a friend on Facebook but I don't think that counts  ;o)  I'm only just an independent IT guy

Mike Halsey

The Start Menu is basically just an Instant Search button.  The rest of it is pretty much vestigial, but there's no real reason to take it off.  Although I can see the benefits of putting the recycle bin on the taskbar... it doesn't need to be in the lower right, dragging-and-dropping to delete is a delicate operation that wouldn't take advantage of the Fitt's Law advantages that the new Show Desktop uses.

What I really don't get how none of the reviews so far have pointed out how gawdawfully painful switching apps really is.

It's all very nice when you just start using it and you're impressed by the newness and the shiny dynamic thumbnails and everything... but as soon as you open more than one window (or tab) in an app, task switching becomes painful... you can't just "click" to switch, you need to to "click - find-the-thumbnail-for-the-window-you-want - click". It reduces efficiency by, like, an order of magnitude.

Just try writing an email in Outlook while occasionally switching over to reference a webpage or Excel doc.  It's painfully slow.

Since 90% of the time, the window you want is the most recent window you used for that application, the fix is simple - clicking the app icon should bring up the last document/tab/window you had open in that app, just like OS X . It can do this while simultaneously showing the hover-over thumbnails for the other windows - it's a win-win proposition. (Basically, it would combine the efficency of OS X's last-window-switching while also incorporating Expose-like thumbnails in the same step.)

Otherwise, I guarantee you people are going to switch back to the XP taskbar style... for the same reason lots of people hate the "group item" option in XP.

"The reason for my statement was that we were discussing click counts (a small part of measuring usabilty)"

I agree. If all you want is to minimize clicks, have your most recently used program shortcuts in your quick launch bar and the rest on the desktop. Your desktop will be horribly cluttered, but at least you've minimized clicks. Isn't that easy (or simple)?

thingy123

The same people who didn't like Group Item in XP and Vista probably won't like Always Combine in Windows 7 for similar reasons. And, can turn it off, as well.

"Just try writing an email in Outlook while occasionally switching over to reference a webpage or Excel doc.  It's painfully slow."

I use Alt+Tab for switching mostly and it's much more useful in 7 and Vista than it is in XP. I find working with a lot of open windows pretty painful in XP. Haven't done it in 7 yet.

@mikegalos - "Is Microsoft secretly getting rid of the Start Menu"

I still don't see it. Paul opines it this way - "Mike Halsey writes that Microsoft is very likely starting the process of removing the Start Menu from Windows in Windows 7. I think he's right"

The closest that I see to that in Mike's article is "Microsoft have an opt-in service to report back on how people use Windows.  This will perhaps now report that people only use the Start Menu to shut it down.  If this does happen, Windows 8 could be a very different beast to the one we’re used to."

In neither case do I see anything about a "secret plot" to get rid of the Start menu. Maybe it is Paul's incorrect translation of Mike's article that has you confused.

--tayme

rather than right click on the icons, is anyone using the left click+push up to access jumplists - really neat & fast.

I for one agree with Paul, if Microsoft is trying to make Windows 7 a halfway between start menu and no start menu, they should just do away with it all together.

Responding to the question about how to do that, it's simple.  Use the built-in speech technologies.  On Vista, I have used mine for 6+ months and very, very rarely go to the Start menu to select an application.  It's as simple as saying 'Start Word'

I do also agree that it would be somewhat helpful if it was still in there, but you had to turn it on.

jpark18

Am I misreading your last sentence? The really top rate but surprisingly unknown Windows Speech Recognition is still in Windows 7.

(More about Windows Speech Recognition later)

WTF is going on with MS.  They are turning Windows 7 into OS X.

Aero Peak = Epose

New Task bar and not start menu = Dock

What next MS iLife...or is that Live apps??

tayme

You seriously don't read "Microsoft is very likely starting the process of removing the Start Menu from Windows" as effectively "Is Microsoft secretly getting rid of the Start Menu" ? How?

Taking out the qualifiers from the sentence leaves "Microsoft is ... removing the Start Menu from Windows"

The two qualifiers ("very likely" meaning "I'm not 100% certain") and ("starting the process of" meaning "not finished" - also implied by the gerund case of remove used in the phrase) don't change the meaning but only qualify the confidence in and progress of the process described.

For example, if I said, "robertsjoe is very likely starting the process of studying High School math" it is, despite the qualifiers saying that I think "robertsjoe is studying High School math"

:-)

the start menu is a great place to store all the junk that you don't use regularly, but needs to be stored somewhere... i don't want thousands of apps in my jumplists or on the taskbar (there isnt room for starters), the start menu seems to be a logically place for these things, one little button to hide a whole ton of stuff that never really gets used, (or occassionally gets used).

@mikegalos

You have missed my point. OS X's Applications list is the equivalent of the Start Menu's All Programs list, both lists are intended for very less frequently used Applications/Programs, users should not have to go in either list on a regular basis. OS X Applications list is more usable because you have unique icons for everything instead of a bunch of folder icons like in All Programs, among other reasons. The OS X Dock replaces the Windows Quick Launch, old Taskbar, and the Start Menu's recent programs (the first list, in Win 7 it defaults to 10 programs). The Dock or 7 Taskbar can fit a large number of Apps/Programs 1 click away, with large icons, making them easier targets and no reading required to disambiguate. If you still want a list of Applications in OS X 2 clicks away rather than the 3 of going through the Finder, you can create any number of Stacks on the Dock which do this, the click equivalent of the Start Menu's recent program list, except the targets are huge compared to the Start Menu .

@thingy123 The reason to dump the Start Menu is that even for All Programs, you have tiny icons which translate into targets only ~20px high, and a fixed height and width box. 236px wide x 392px high for the All Programs list. There is just no reason this should be constrained to a size less then the width of the smartphones we use.

Lindy

Microsoft had the equivalent of "Expose" for several years with the Instant Viewer wheel button click on Microsoft IntelliPoint mouse. (If you have a Microsoft Mouse, click the center button (the scroll wheel)

The Start Menu isn't going away.

@ Lindy

How is aero peek the same as expose?

expose is a window switcher (a neat one at that) and aero peek is used to show desktop or to show open windows singularly?

New Taskbar is reminiscent of windows 1.01 taskbar as well as the dock.

And the start menu ain't gone anywhere (at least for the foreseable future)

@Stimshady, the jumplist click-drag thing is pretty cool, especially if you do it really slowly, it has a rather neat little animation.

Also, you can click and drag down in IE8 to show history etc.

@gorath...

something weird i have discovered:

1) keep the left click held down throughout ALL of this.

2) left click on IE8 icon

3) push up with mouse to reveal jumplist (keep left click held down)

4) roll back down so cursor is over the IE8 icon (keep left click held down)

5) now, keeping left click held down, right click the mouse and release RIGHT button only.

The jump list grows in size (double width) - weird, eh?

Yep, I definitely find the Start Menu useful. Keep it and let us continue to customize it to make life easy [less clicks]. Also, it took time, but now I like the Mac OS Dock.

@gorath I watched a MS video of peek and it was described by the MS person as a Windows switcher.  They are not exactly the same but close and will be compared.

Most people are not going to remember Windows 1.01 if they ever used it and so if they compare the new changes in the interface, and have touched a Mac its going to be compared to the Mac.

Dont get me wrong I REALLY like Windows 7.  After using it a few days, once its gone gold I will recommend it to Windows using friends, where I would not Vista.  To me its Vista finished/polished, and I have always thought the security for home users that Vista brought was better than XP.  The fact that it runs well on a netbook is another plus.

Now if they could just copy spaces it would be even better.

@mikegalos - I read that as Paul's incorrect opinion of what Mike Halsey wrote...not what Mike Halsey wrote. I have yet to locate that in Mike's article. I still do not see the "secretly" part of it. Are you seriously saying that Paul thinks that there is a conspiracy at Microsoft to get rid of the Start menu or did you just add that word because you think there is some sort of conspiracy?

--tayme

"@gorath I watched a MS video of peek and it was described by the MS person as a Windows switcher. "

And so, you added 2 and 2 and inferred that it was copied from Expose.

I thought Peek was an easy way to look at the gadgets.

"Now if they could just copy spaces it would be even better."

Huh?

Microsoft already has two virtual desktop managers. One was an XP Powertoy called "Virtual Desktop Manager" and the other is a tool released by sysinternals: technet.microsoft.com/.../cc817881.aspx

Yes, they were both copied from Spaces. :-)

tayme

Secretly doesn't mean "There's a conspiracy". It means "This is being done and they haven't said it"

shark47

For that matter, there was a virtual desktop manager in the Windows 3.0 Resource Kit in 1990. I bet that was copied from Spaces, too!

Apparently Mac fans think that Microsoft doesn't just have a photocopier, they have a time machine, too, so they could copy Apple's software and introduce the copy 16 years in the past. <cue scary music>

:-)

Guys please!  Calm down!

Here's what I see as being the situation.  Microsoft have said a couple of years or so ago they wanted a 'new' interface.  They're not ready to dump the Start Menu yet as there'd be outcry over the steep learning curve and, after the fiasco with Vista, they MUST sell this OS to businesses.  They're just using the taskbar to get everyone accustomed to what is going to replace the Start Menu (probably something along the lines of what Paul and I described).  They just bring themselves to give us more of it now, which is annoying from my point of view!

There's no conspiracy on the part of Paul or anyone else.   Microsoft have made it clear for years now what their intentions are and told me today in an email that my ideas are "Interesting" but not what they're after at this moment in time.

@Stimshady, you're right! very strange.

Once you've done that, the list also stays open even if you move your mouse away from it

@mikegalos - So, you added the word for the sake of clarity, then. Gotcha. Now, can you tell me where Mike Halsey states anything close to "Microsoft is [secretly] planning to remove the Start menu." Copy and paste from the linked article...or the one that Mike links in it...I am not seeing it. In fact, it seems to me that it is only Paul and you that seem to think that Mike said that.

--tayme

"What next MS iLife...or is that Live apps??"

Actually, I'd say that MobileMe is a weak ripoff of Windows Live.

Windows Live Essentials may rival the features in iLife, but I'd say that the cloud tie-in is much more robust than what Apple currently offers.  You can look at the number of compatible partners sites and online services for a good look at how well this stuff interacts with 3rd party stuff.

tayme

I never said Mike Halsey said that.

I said he expressed some opinions and people here (including Paul) treated it as though it was a leaked official plan from Redmond.

@mikeaspatrick - Thanks for the clarification. That is pretty much how I took your article, and I agree with you, OSes change regularly and this is the next logical step for Windows. But, it is a hobby of mine to push mikegalos' buttons...mainly because it is fun, and partly because mikegalos likes to put on his Microsoft only blinders in any discussion on Paul's site. I try to look at things with an open mind.

--tayme

Honestly, as far as I'm concerned, keep the Start Menu as is. I keep, at most, six icons on my desktop -- and most of those are for items I rarely run anyway (such as shortcuts to menus) or for files I use for storing items that I'm moving to my external hard drive after using (such as executable files).

Most of the time, I go to the Start menu, from which I click on my most-used apps -- especially since the most-used apps show up at the left side of Start anyway.Then I click on the right side for Documents and other storage areas. It's easier for me and more importantly, it allows me to find the rarely-used programs that I will eventually use.

Now, making it easier for someone like me to pin items to the Start Menu would be great. I can then pick the apps and  particular files that I use often or rarely use, but need on occasion. This would make organization easier, but even eliminate those ugly, cartoonish icons that are found on both Windows and Mac.

Docks? Those ugly things? Seriously. The dock is the part of OS-X I hate the most. And I find it as useless as some of you find the Start menu.

By the way: Let's consider the reality that, for most people, the Start Menu is the first place they go. As power users, most of us may think that silly (I don't, but that's me). But for the average person, the docks and even the icons are key parts of their working life on computers. The latter is one I hate to admit is a reality, even though I find icons totally useless.

Think about what the average person uses before advocating for some change in interface design that is 1) actually more useful than you think, 2) create an unneccesarily steep learning curve for all but the power users and 3) is sort of innocuous for those power users who have other things to obsess about.

Pingback from  The Long Climb &raquo; Windows 7 and Beyond&#8230; The Way Forward

@mikegalos - Who, besides Paul, treated it that way? I saw a lot of good idea sharing, questions, and opinions...none of which made me jump to the conclusion that anybody was thinking that it came straight from Redmond. Now, if robertsjoe came on and said "Microsoft is copying the dock again because they know that Windows is dead" then I would agree with you...but that hasn't happened, at least not yet today.

--tayme

Sevenmack

Changing anything without a very good reason is often a problem when you have a billion users.

As an example, edlin.exe is still around. It doesn't cost much to keep it and there are still a few people who use it (mostly in .cmd batch files).

(For those who weren't around in the early MS-DOS days, edlin is a line oriented text editor)

tayme

Since you posted multiple times that I thought so (when clearly I said the opposite), I'll let you practice your reading skills.

Speed, security and lower hardware requirements should be paramount, and I'm reading that 7 seems to have achieved most, at least in beta. If security is great, then MS has done well. But we all have such different needs, ideas and demands, that no one could possibly please 1 billion users. So lets hope that most can be fulfilled. But I think that my ideas are better than all of yours and should take precedence;)

For those talking about conspiracy theories et al, I've just posted a follow up article for you on my site (hope Paul doesn't mind me linking to it here).

www.thelongclimb.com

Mike Halsey

@mikegalos - "Since you posted multiple times that I thought so..."

Not multiple times...in fact, the only time that I posted that you thought so was, "In fact, it seems to me that it is only Paul and you that seem to think that Mike said that. " and if you read closely, you'll notice my preface of "it seems to me", which at that time, it did. I will gladly take that back now. You did not express that you thought that Mike Halsey said that...just "people here (including Paul) treated it as though it was a leaked official plan from Redmond." Now, how about telling me who; besides, in your opinion and mine, Paul; has treated it as though it was leaked from Redmond?

--tayme

"Microsoft already has two virtual desktop managers. One was an XP Powertoy called "Virtual Desktop Manager" and the other is a tool released by sysinternals: technet.microsoft.com/.../cc817881.aspx

Yes, they were both copied from Spaces. :-)"

^ The fact they're third party tools / not integrated is a big disadvantage versus something like spaces though - for example, there are big trade offs with both of them (the sysinternals one spawns multiple explorer processes, for example, and can't show tray icons except on the first desktop. Quite a big disadvantage).

Would be pleased to see a fully integrated multiple desktop system in Wn7, but considering we're beta already, I assume it's a big fat no :/

It looks as if you can install with Bootcamp and then run with VMware. Also can install with VirtualBox....if any one is interested.

I have never found a good use for Spaces on my Macs, or for a virtual desktop manager in any OS. Just switching windows is easy enough for me. Oddly enough, though...I do like tabbed browsing, and I guess that the two are similar. Maybe I should give it another go.

--tayme

"The reason for my statement was that we were discussing click counts (a small part of measuring usabilty)"

Agree that isn't the whole story. For example, 100 icons on the desktop is one click, but 10 minutes squinting at too  many icons. (And fugly besides.)

Using Spotlight (or Butler or Launchbar) on OS X as an app launcher is:

apple-space (or other command key defined as you wish)

w-o-r

return

And Microsoft Word is launched.  I am repeating myself, but I LOVE this method. No clicks, no Fitts law considerations, the interface element is invisible until invoked and then disappears when the task is completed.

To forestall comments: This isn't at all like a terminal and the key differences are that there is (1) almost no sense of modality, since the launcher hot key (apple-spacebar) is so quick, (2) the launchers have predictive text recognition, ie, they learn that w-o-r means "Microsoft Word".

I don't know if there are similar tools on Windows, but, Mac or Windows, you're missing out if you don't try them. Not everyone like this approach, but I do, and it seems like one suited for experienced users as represented on this board.

Paul

I am so confused - you dislike the enhanced toolbar but want to drop the Start Menu. inherently, dropping the Start Menu would require enhancing the Taskbar ... no?

"If security is great, then MS has done well. But we all have such different needs, ideas and demands, that no one could possibly please 1 billion users."

Here's an opinion from the SBS MVP of the Year:

msmvps.com/.../say-no-to-butt-crack.aspx

It's funny, but it's true.

chuckb48

The equivalent to your example in Windows Vista or 7 is:

WindowsKey

wor<enter>

If you tap the Windows Key, the cursor defaults to the search bar.

never wanted to use the start menu that much, that's why i have what i use on the desktop,

From the article mike posted earlier:

"Enjoy The Fish. I’m surprised that not many people seem to have caught the subtle joke with the Siamese fighting fish that is part of the default background, so I’ll do my part at keeping the secret hidden. Check out wikipedia for a clue. "

I was wondering what that fish was doing in there!

So, we actually have a Shark asking what that fish is doing there?

Just as in an FYI, there's a lot more information in the article than just a hint at why there's a fish.

OT: FYI: Live Mesh will be updating their client later today.

OT: More about Windows Speech Recognition later today.

You're right, I found the reason in the wikipedia, you just need to read between the lines:

"Bettas can get constipated when their diet lacks variety"

"Bettas can get constipated when their diet lacks variety"

You mean like running on only one company's hardware?

I knew that you would come back with that one. You're getting predictable! So, as they say in Germany, touché! Or was that Spain?

Or in Philly, Friggin' aye!

Doc

PS, I always wanted a blue Betta, as I though it was one of the most beautiful fresh water fish. I just didn't want to leave it alone and didn't really care for the know compatible fish. It looks better with a lighter background.

That's French...

But actually mike's answer was a good one (and the one you wanted to hear, I guess).

I can't believe it, but I found this purely by accident and coincidence:

www.youtube.com/watch

At least I didn't know about it. Go figure!

@tayme: "Now, if robertsjoe came on and said "Microsoft is copying the dock again because they know that Windows is dead" then I would agree with you...but that hasn't happened, at least not yet today."

Of course I would not say that. Windows is not dead. But you're right. It's Windows moving more and more towards what's better; in this case being the OS X dock. Microsoft, the new Xerox.

"You mean like running on only one company's hardware?"

What only runs on one company's hardware? Oh, I know...z/OS.

--tayme

@murdocdv "There is just no reason this should be constrained to a size less then the width of the smartphones we use."

Well, I guess that's a reason to bring back the old start menu.... or even the XP way of handling the All Programs list... or heck, just make the box resizable.  (Constraining the programs list to that tiny box is one of those things I never really understood, I think it was a poor solution for people that have difficultly manipulating large menus...)

tayme

I don't know. zOS might run on an old Amdahl.

@ Robertsjoe:

"Microsoft, the new Xerox."

Erm, do you realise the irony in that sentence? Either way, that's pretty funny!

"What only runs on one company's hardware?"

Irix.

"What only runs on one company's hardware?"

AmigaOS?

RiscOS?

Arthur?

"What only runs on one company's hardware?"

Commodore BASIC

TRS-80 BASIC

@robertsjoe:

Apple's plans for initially locking down iPhone development to web gadgets in Safari are already dead.  And now the base for that platform is a sinking ship:

blogs.zdnet.com/Apple

....not soon enough either:

blogs.zdnet.com/security

chuckb84:

Vista has the same idea as launching apps from Spotlight:

Start > Seach > start typing the name of the app you and hit enter.

Search based app launching works equally well in Mac and Windows.

------

I kind of like the Dock approach to opening and managing applications. In Vista, the only real app launching I do is from the Search box.

I used to customize the hell out of my XP (and pre XP) Start Menus: I'd delete shortcuts for apps I never used, and create a few folders for the ones I'd use all the time. Vista has made customizing the Start Menu programs list damn near impossible for some reason so I'm stuck using search to open apps.

With the Dock in OS X I can keep the icons for the apps I use all the time and I know which ones are running. For the apps I don't use all the time, there is Spotlight, or Shift+Apple+A for the Applications folder, of I can create a Stack to the Application folder...

I think MS is on the right track for the taskbar in Win7 - but it's going to take a few more versions to get it "just-so".

Pingback from  Windows 7 Start Menu. Should It Go? &laquo; Tragicallyunhip