Maybe you meant to say vlite not nlite ?
No, I meant to say N-Lite, please read. That is what the person I was quoting claimed to have used to enable a classic menu in Windows 7. Besides, vLite wasn't/isn't able to configure a classic startmenu in Vista either and there hasn't been a new version of vLite released since summer last year. Now if you'd stop ripping your replies to my posts out of the thread they were placed in then you might not have felt the need to mistakenly reply saying that maybe I meant vLite. I didn't.
Microsoft is moving everyone into the 21st century with a new start menu. They have made this decision for the betterment of all of us. Once a user learns how to use the new start menu 99% of the time he/she likes it better.
If that would be true then somewhere, in the past 8 years, I should have started preferring the new menu and stopped using the classic one. But that didn't happen. Does that make me belong to the select 1 % ? Besides, if that were true then why did Microsoft include the classic when they released Longhorn in the first place. It would have been more logical to drop it back then and not now with [quote Bill Gates]: "an incremental upgrade to Vista".
No, this makes you to belong to one of 30%. See this poll: http://windows7forums.com/windows-7-discussion/1876-classic-vs-new-start-menu.htmlDoes that make me belong to the select 1 % ?
No, this makes you to belong to one of 30%. See this poll: http://windows7forums.com/windows-7-discussion/1876-classic-vs-new-start-menu.html
No, this makes you to belong to one of 30%. See this poll: http://windows7forums.com/windows-7-discussion/1876-classic-vs-new-start-menu.html
It may have hurt.
The biggest complaint. In fact, almost the only complaint, which subsquently led to other issues, was that Vista was a resource hogger. It was Microsoft's deliberate intention, when cleaning it up into its new form - Windows 7, to make sure there was no superfluous or uneeded items which led to that problem.
If they now bowed to the wishes of all who were requesting small additions, which had existed in legacy OS's, they would be heading back toward square one.
As I said very much earlier, I had avoided entering this very controversial thread. There is no real answer as it is most certainly a matter of taste. The classic menu will not be returning. I prefer the \"new\" menu. Having said what I wished, I am now cowardly backing out of this thread!!
Thanks a lot Una ! It's good to see some real figures. 1 % would make me a niche user. 30 % isn't a niche !!
If it was Microsoft's intention to clear up resource hogging useless stuff, they would have started with removing aero and glass effects. They didn't. And all the software necessary to make a classic start menu work is still there, only the option to switch to it disappeared. If the classic start menu is such a resource hog, how come it was there in Windows 95 when Windows could run in 16 Mb of memory ?
The aero is so true . How more resource hoggin can you get then to have a movie running as a wallpaper .
I never even tested that one LOL Even without the running movie turning off aero (but keeping a pretty wallpaper) displayed a 50-100 Mb drop in memory use.
Well to jump in on this topic I should point out that I have a great number of clients over the age of 65 including a wonderful little old lady who used to shoot down enemy aircraft in England during WWII. A number of them use Vista but prefer the classic menu style because it is what they are used to and DO NOT like things to change simply because they are having a difficult enough time remembering what they have already managed to learn.
As technically savy people we sometimes forget that although we love cutting edge technology there is still a part of our population that is not so comfortable with change that deserve better then to be left behind or left out in our ever demanding need for change.
I have often told these people that there is always more then one way of doing things in Windows and none of them are the absolutely correct way of doing it. You do it the way you can remember to do it. Taking away those options does not take into consideration those of use who will be very uncomfortable with the change.
Personally I like the new menu but that little old lady from England freaks when a desk top icon is not where it is suppose to be.
Yes ? WhatIt isn't about not wanting to keep up with cutting edge new technology. The default start menu isn't new, it's about 10 years old and was introduced with XP. The problem with it is that it's inferior in every possible sense when compared to the classic style menu. It opens as a huge thing filling up half the screen with 70 % of it consisting of ... nothing. Plain white/gray space. Let's say I want to open the "Windows imaging interface reference" in the WAIK.
Classic menu:
CLICK Start. Move mouse to programs -> Microsoft Windows AIK -> Documentation -> SDK and then CLICK a second time on "Windows imaging interface reference". Got it ? 2 clicks.
Default menu:
CLICK start, Then CLICK All Programs so that something appears in the huge grey/white space. CLICK on the scroll bar and move down until Microsoft Windows AIK appears and CLICK on that. Then CLICK on Documentation so that SDK appears and CLICK on that so that, finally, "Windows imaging interface reference" appears and CLICK on that. Got it ? 7 clicks.
You really must love clicking to call that improvement.