Windows 8.1 may include a straight to the desktop setting

[anuseems]

There are two main points of criticism in regards to Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system. First the missing start menu which has been more or less replaced with the start screen, and then that the operating system loads in to the start screen interface after log in with no setting to change that behavior so that it boots into the desktop interface instead.

Both issues can be corrected quite easily with free and paid applications such as Classic Shell, Start8, Start Menu 8 and numerous other programs. Most Windows 8 users new to the system should not have any issues finding and installing those programs, considering that news about their existence has been spread throughout the Internet and magazines.

Businesses on the other hand may be reluctant to install third party software to add the functionality back to the Windows 8 system.

Windows 8.1 or Windows Blue will be out this year if things go along as planned, and one of the changes that users may see in the upgrade is an ability to go directly to the desktop interface to bypass the start screen. How we know that? The guys over at Microsoft Portal (http://microsoftportal.net/windows-blue/2037-windows-blue-pozvolit-otklyuchit-startovyy-ekran.html) have discovered a function that hints at it in one of the operating system's files.

The CanSuppressStartScreen option in twinui.dll hints at that possibility. It needs to be noted though that we are talking about a development build and not the final version of Windows 8.1. A lot can happen until the final version is released and it can very well be that Microsoft is just experimenting with a set of features that may or may not land in Windows 8.1 later on this year.

My opinion? I think Microsoft can silence many critics of the operating system if they implement this behavior, and maybe even add an optional start menu back to the operating system as well. While the latter seems unlikely, the option to bypass the Windows 8 start screen would certainly be a step in the right direction. (via http://stadt-bremerhaven.de/windows-8-1-neuer-startbildschirm-deaktivierbar/)

[RobrPatty]

Here! Here!

[Mr Orus]

Interesting news ... we just have to wait caverns developments and releases preview and final.

[calguyhunk]

There are two main points of criticism in regards to Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system.

Only two? :hehe:

[dMog]

the start screen is meant for touch screens... why in the world did Microsoft not foresee this as an issue for new computer owners that did NOT buy a tablet or a touch screen notebook...not that see the start screen as a huge issue to deal with as opposed to the desk top... just a minor thing to get used to ...or as others stated you fix this for with FREE software

[LiLmEgZ]

I wouldn't be holding ur breath on the boot to desktop mode... probably wont happen

[DesiPirate]

Too late for windows 8 (MS) to come out of coma :P Now the party is over. :rofl:

[dcs18]

I'll be closely monitoring just the one critical point (for me) - does it really come with a performance that exceeds Windows 8? Nothing else, IMO - is insurmountable.

The performance saturation of Windows 7 was the only one criterion that prompted me to move on, to Windows 8.

[MidnightDistortions]

I think even if MS does let the user start in desktop mode there might be a good number of people (or critics) that will continue berating the OS. That really isn't the only problem with Win 8 along with the lack of a start menu which you can easily get back with different layouts. The lack of Aero glass is minor considering you can customise the desktop anyway you wish.

The only problem i see is what is MIcrosoft doing with Windows. Are they trying to get everyone over to touch? Trying to get rid of the desktop environment? Or are they simply just trying to compete with tablets/phones? Were they trying to revive the PC market by implementing touch screen?

You can't really compete tablets with desktops when people just want to check email, read news, text other people or listen to music which they can do with a tablet. Microsoft imo has it all wrong, it isn't touch that people want.. there is a lack of innovation in what the PC can really do. Besides hardcore (graphic intensive) gamers there isn't much innovation in the desktop. 3D holograms is one idea but other than gaming the common desktop PC has all that untapped potential that tablets and phones can't do quite yet. There also might be other functionality that desktops can do that hasn't been thought up yet.

I just wonder if MS will figure this out before completely alienating the userbase.

[MAXS]

What about Start Menu :lol: ?

[Jerkso]

It is surprising that people find the lack of a start menu so detrimental when I find the new system as functional and faster than the previous. But I have realized in my small number of opportunities that those whom it seems to matter most are those to which using the mouse is the only input source. And typing is something only attempted when using a webpage address bar and text box.

Furthermore is really is shocking this entire article really announces solutions to a problem that does not exist and yet seems to be already fixed. The start menu is not missing, it has simply been replaced by different system, which isn't so quickly accessible if you do not use the dedicated key on most keyboards... actually keyboards I can remember seeing and using in the last 10 years.

The only problem i see is what is MIcrosoft doing with Windows. Are they trying to get everyone over to touch? Trying to get rid of the desktop environment? Or are they simply just trying to compete with tablets/phones? Were they trying to revive the PC market by implementing touch screen?

You can't really compete tablets with desktops when people just want to check email, read news, text other people or listen to music which they can do with a tablet. Microsoft imo has it all wrong, it isn't touch that people want.. there is a lack of innovation in what the PC can really do. Besides hardcore (graphic intensive) gamers there isn't much innovation in the desktop. 3D holograms is one idea but other than gaming the common desktop PC has all that untapped potential that tablets and phones can't do quite yet. There also might be other functionality that desktops can do that hasn't been thought up yet.

It really must be apparent to anyone that uses touch screen interfaces on systems as varied from factory equipment to medical imaging computers that all the claims of touchscreen being the MS goal as total rubbish. Really think everyone at Microsoft missed issues of fingerprints an annoying problem and my arms get heavy quickly if i have to touch vertical screens all day. Furthermore my ability to navigate quickly is drastically reduced as my travel time between items on multiple screens would involve massive movements like standing up or a step to the side. ...

Though I really do feel that it is actually touch that people want, but a far more sophisticated device or devices is needed to replace the keyboard and mouse and to do so without losing any critical features or functionality. Additionally any replacement must not alienate current users or be more difficult to learn than typing seems to be for a lot of casual users.

So MidnightDistortions, I disagree with that innovation being is limited, with the Metro system I would imagine it has been significantly expanded. Increating the possibilities that can be developed and prototyped without heavy hardware requirements for fundamental capabilities in touch based systems beyond the screen we are all used to. Hopefully the bar has been lowered far enough by Microsoft and touch being more prominent that people will start to innovate and that when they do the OS wont hold them back.

PC innovation seems to be nothing more that in the hardware sphere at least to be just smaller, faster, more, less whatever number is better... of whatever component. A Totally uninspiring bit of reading when it comes to hardware news.

So start menu missing is nothing major and touch interfaces will not be touch screens not as I know it now.. cause no way people or businesses are going to follow microsoft down a path of decreased productivity and full body RSI risks and cubic meters per desk being need.

Anyone else got some news covering improvements not regressions?

[MidnightDistortions]

It is surprising that people find the lack of a start menu so detrimental when I find the new system as functional and faster than the previous. But I have realized in my small number of opportunities that those whom it seems to matter most are those to which using the mouse is the only input source. And typing is something only attempted when using a webpage address bar and text box.

Furthermore is really is shocking this entire article really announces solutions to a problem that does not exist and yet seems to be already fixed. The start menu is not missing, it has simply been replaced by different system, which isn't so quickly accessible if you do not use the dedicated key on most keyboards... actually keyboards I can remember seeing and using in the last 10 years.

The only problem i see is what is MIcrosoft doing with Windows. Are they trying to get everyone over to touch? Trying to get rid of the desktop environment? Or are they simply just trying to compete with tablets/phones? Were they trying to revive the PC market by implementing touch screen?

You can't really compete tablets with desktops when people just want to check email, read news, text other people or listen to music which they can do with a tablet. Microsoft imo has it all wrong, it isn't touch that people want.. there is a lack of innovation in what the PC can really do. Besides hardcore (graphic intensive) gamers there isn't much innovation in the desktop. 3D holograms is one idea but other than gaming the common desktop PC has all that untapped potential that tablets and phones can't do quite yet. There also might be other functionality that desktops can do that hasn't been thought up yet.

It really must be apparent to anyone that uses touch screen interfaces on systems as varied from factory equipment to medical imaging computers that all the claims of touchscreen being the MS goal as total rubbish. Really think everyone at Microsoft missed issues of fingerprints an annoying problem and my arms get heavy quickly if i have to touch vertical screens all day. Furthermore my ability to navigate quickly is drastically reduced as my travel time between items on multiple screens would involve massive movements like standing up or a step to the side. ...

Though I really do feel that it is actually touch that people want, but a far more sophisticated device or devices is needed to replace the keyboard and mouse and to do so without losing any critical features or functionality. Additionally any replacement must not alienate current users or be more difficult to learn than typing seems to be for a lot of casual users.

So MidnightDistortions, I disagree with that innovation being is limited, with the Metro system I would imagine it has been significantly expanded. Increating the possibilities that can be developed and prototyped without heavy hardware requirements for fundamental capabilities in touch based systems beyond the screen we are all used to. Hopefully the bar has been lowered far enough by Microsoft and touch being more prominent that people will start to innovate and that when they do the OS wont hold them back.

PC innovation seems to be nothing more that in the hardware sphere at least to be just smaller, faster, more, less whatever number is better... of whatever component. A Totally uninspiring bit of reading when it comes to hardware news.

So start menu missing is nothing major and touch interfaces will not be touch screens not as I know it now.. cause no way people or businesses are going to follow microsoft down a path of decreased productivity and full body RSI risks and cubic meters per desk being need.

Anyone else got some news covering improvements not regressions?

The problem is with the lack of a start menu is alienating users. The start screen is a full screen app (takes up the entire screen) versus one that takes up a corner on a section of the screen allowing you to multitask. The start screen should have been less intrusive to begin with and a more familiar desktop environment so it prevents users from feeling alienated. Start menu nothing major? It's among one of the reasons i am sticking with Win 7. Even if they return most of the features Win 7 had, if the start menu is still missing i would not upgrade to that system. Most Win 8 users are utilizing the 3rd party downloads to get the start menu back so it is a major deal. Windows 8 is not more or less functional than Win 7 is, other than a slight increase in performance (possibly due to a lack of Aero Glass). The start screen is really no different than having Google Chrome (or the browser of your choice) with a tab session running much of the same apps on the screen. Sure Win 8's setup would prove more useful on a slower machine but i got an i7 that can handle that easily. All Windows 8 is, it's a different UI doing the same thing i already do with Win 7. The only innovation Win 8 really has is touch. Again something that is possible with Win 7.

Then again you don't see me going out to buy a touch screen monitor either. I don't find it as necessary for my desktop. The company i work for doesn't use touch either, they know it exists but again it's not a necessary thing. Some people might want it but it seems fairly irrelevant to others. And last but not least since MS decided to shove the new UI down everyone's throat, it might be possible they wanted to sneak in a store so users would spend more money on apps. It already happened with the start menu. I'm not claiming that was the true intention of Win 8, i'm only speculating here.

[anuseems]

Microsoft may be ready to address two of the most common complaints about Windows 8 with its upcoming Blue update. Specifically, The Verge cites sources familiar with the companys plans who claim builds of Windows 8.1 are being tested with an option to skip the Metro start screen and boot directly to the traditional desktop. A separate report from ZDNet seconds this and also suggests that the Start menu might make a comeback.

Signs of a boot-to-desktop option were spotted a few days ago in a leaked build of Windows Blue. Apparently the option is disabled by default and theres currently no toggle to enable it in the operating systems settings panel. But the code is there. Its possible Microsoft still hasn't decided on whether to implement this in the final Blue release, though ZDNets Mary Jo Foley says her sources have confirmed this is now looking like the plan.

Whether Microsoft will bring back the Start button is even more uncertain. The Verge says the hot corners that bring up the modern-style Start menu and the Charms bar will remain intact if the boot to desktop option is enabled, but Foley says Microsoft is also considering bringing back the Start button as an option.

Its worth noting that you can accomplish both behaviors -- boot to desktop and bringing back the start menu -- through some fairly simple workarounds or using third party software. But having the options baked into the Windows 8 UI through the system settings screen would make things much simpler for all users.

Microsoft has so far been reluctant of letting users skip the modern-style interface so easily, and defended its stance by saying users find the new interface easy to learn once they give it a chance.

While it's understandable that the company is trying to push a consistent user experience that spans across multiple Windows devices, those against Metro claim the interface doesnt really make sense for non-touch-screen machines. If the new options indeed make it to Windows 8.1 it will give everyone the option to make a gradual shift or just maintain the classic Windows feel... at least for a while longer.

@ http://www.techspot.com/news/52255-microsoft-yields-boot-to-desktop-start-menu-options-in-windows-81.html

[Mr Orus]

Thx..@ anuseems For top news!

[DKT27]

Microsoft's strategy:

Take away:

Gears, brakes, accelerator and steering wheel.

Give back:

Gears.

Yeah, a car will run just with gears. :)

[MidnightDistortions]

Microsoft has so far been reluctant of letting users skip the modern-style interface so easily, and defended its stance by saying users find the new interface easy to learn once they give it a chance.

While it's understandable that the company is trying to push a consistent user experience that spans across multiple Windows devices, those against Metro claim the interface doesnt really make sense for non-touch-screen machines. If the new options indeed make it to Windows 8.1 it will give everyone the option to make a gradual shift or just maintain the classic Windows feel... at least for a while longer.

@ http://www.techspot.com/news/52255-microsoft-yields-boot-to-desktop-start-menu-options-in-windows-81.html

I wonder why MS is trying to force the UI on users. Windows 8 seems to be really forced compared to the previous OS's. It's the cheapest one yet and they assume that no one uses the start menu and possibly thinking the desktop should be ancient history. It could be trying to force desktop users to upgrade to touch or to learn the interface. I don't know.. it feels like there's something more to this then MS trying to implement touch on desktops.

[Beamslider]

http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/16/4229900/windows-8-1-boot-to-desktop-option

Seems confirmed...Option to avoid Metro.

[MidnightDistortions]

Someone argued that MS should get rid of the desktop entirely for favor of Metro, i laught. :rofl:

[dcs18]

Windows 8.1 may include a straight to the desktop setting

I'm not at all worried about this aspect - that can also be influenced quite easily via registry edit (exactly as it is in Windows 8.)

[mrgoodtimes]

Microsoft has so far been reluctant of letting users skip the modern-style interface so easily, and defended its stance by saying users find the new interface easy to learn once they give it a chance.

I really tried to use the metro/modern UI for a month, and really did my best to like it--placed tiles of all my frequently used programs, arranged those tiles into groups, experimented with live tiles. Initially, I thought "this isn't so bad" as people over the web put it. Then after a few weeks the idiosyncrasies of the modern interface crept into me. For example:

1. Search does not display everything by category, instead you sometimes get a blank page for apps, while the thing you're searching for all this time was in the "settings" category.

2. The start screen doesn't even have a built-in clock/date. Sure you can move the cursor to the top right corner, and/or even download an app that displays a live tile for the date & time, but that is beside the point, why do I have to go through such hoops just to see the time? In the desktop, all you need to do is just glance for a second on the lower left corner of the screen and you're done. No unnecessary mouse gestures, no live tiles to waste CPU cycles.

3. My computer usage doesn't let me really use the modern interface at all. Boot-Login- from metro launch excel, (now at desktop) open outlook, winamp, photoshop, mount VHDs, open "legacy programs" to connect to office vpn, then perhaps play a game when given extra time. When done, shutdown. I used metro ui for a second, and that's it. Pretty pointless for my usage.

So after a month, I finally gave up and bought a license of StartIsBack. Makes more sense.