Windows 8 Tip: Boot Directly to the Desktop with Skip Metro Suite

You can skip the Start screen on boot without paying, and without adding a silly Start button to Windows 8

Jan. 5, 2013 Paul Thurrott

Those trying to replace the new Metro-style experiences in Windows 8 are missing the point: These interfaces are the future of the PC, and I feel it’s better to dive right in, learn and master them, and stop pining for obsolete UIs like the Start button and the Start menu. That said, most Windows 8 users today are still using traditional PCs and are working almost exclusively with desktop applications. So it does make sense to jump directly to the desktop when you sign-in on such machines. And a free new utility is arguably the best way to make that happen.

Note: Way back in July, I wrote a similar tip, Windows 8 Tip: Boot Directly to the Desktop with Start8, which focused on the same issue. But the Start8 utility mentioned in that article is inferior for two reasons. One, it puts an unnecessary Start button on the Windows 8 taskbar. And two, it’s no longer free. Its maker now charges $4.99 for the utility. (It was free at the time I wrote the tip.)

Note: Skip Metro Suite is itself a desktop application so it only works with Windows 8 and Windows 8 Pro, and not with Windows RT.

Booting directly to the desktop is something I just wrote about in Fixing Windows 8, Part 2: Boot to the Desktop, where I described it as a no-brainer. But some will misunderstand the not so subtle difference between this need—which does nothing to subvert or remove any Metro-style user interfaces—with more Draconian measures such as replacing the Start screen with a Windows 7-style Start menu. I do not advocate that latter tactic at all. As noted previously, it’s important that PC users learn to work with the Metro-style UIs. Skipping directly to the desktop on boot—or on sign-in, more correctly—does nothing to prevent that.

There will probably be many ways to make this work, and I’m still hopeful that Microsoft will see the light and make this an optional but native capability of Windows 8 down the road. In the meantime, we have Skip Metro Suite, which is free and works well. I’m using it on my two primary PCs, a desktop tower and a non-touch Ultrabook.

Download Skip Metro Suite.

One comment about this utility: Choose the right features.Skip Metro Suite does allow you to disable certain Metro “hot corner” features like Switcher, drag to close, the Start tip, and even the Charms bar. I strongly recommend against disabling these features. If you’re going to use Windows 8, use Windows 8. My recommendation is to simply enable the option “Skip Start Screen.”

Enjoy.

Discuss this Article 48

pdskep

on Jan 5, 2013

I don't understand why pressing one button after boot is so difficult you have to download software to avoid it.

pthurrott

on Jan 5, 2013

Then don't worry about this utility. :)

ScubaDog2008

on Jan 6, 2013

Yes, yes, we get that, Paul. But as someone who truly see where the live tiles and Metro style can really go (I think more so than even Microsoft), I am frustrated and, admittedly, angry that so many people seem to be so simple-minded that they can't and/or refuse to embrace this new concept and help push it to it's logical success. Instead, so many seem to just expend ridiculous effort and energy to empower folks to stay stuck in an old world. It's like giving vodka to an alcoholic. We need to stop empowering the dim-witted, in my opinion. Steve Jobs certainly didn't care to cater to them.

naomi20

on Apr 25, 2013

I'm not dim-witted or simple minded. I hate Windows 8, its the worst thing to ever happen. Why? Because over 20 years of computer knowledge and experience is suddenly worthless. I don't care about about facebook twitter, whatever, I just want to turn my computer on and work. I fedup of being in the middle of something and stupid menus pop up or the screen flips to something else, I can't find things, things disappear and I don't know how to get them back. It has seriously slowed me down and as I run a business from my computer is seriously threatening my livlihood. Yes I could go on a training course, but when? I don't have time. I'm busy busy and now busier still trying to work the stupid thing. I hate it. I dont mind change but Windows 8 is just too much all at once. And if thats your opinion of people like me that hate Windows 8, more vodka please.
Naomi

roncerr

on Jan 6, 2013

Good point. If Paul advocates using the built-in features of Windows 8, why not use the built-in Start-Screen Desktop icon? I doubt if Paul would criticize Windows 8 if it had come with a start menu for hardware sold without touch. The real problem is that Microsoft has taken away useful features that were previously part of Windows: a built-in powerful email client like Outlook Express or Windows Mail, Media Center for real TV via a cable card adapter box, a browser that worked on all websites, instant messaging over the LAN (Winpopup) and they added unnecessary complexities like "Home" networking, Libraries, UAC, and duplicated user files so they all appear twice in Explorer.

realtestman

on Jan 7, 2013

Ronceit - Microsoft has ALWAYS removed features from prior versions of Windows when they're not necessary. Stop crying.

"a built-in powerful email client" - you do realise it was dropped from Windows more than 5 years ago when Windows 7 was launched?

"Media Centre" - not dropped. You can download it.

"a browser that worked on all websites" - how can Microsoft do that when it's up to the website developers to make it work? What a silly thing to say.

Instant messaging over the LAN - such a basic not-needed service, which is why it was removed.

Leaving things on the odd chance that some random person is going to need it is not a good way to develop a product (of any kind).

Wicc999

on Jan 5, 2013

The desktop is right there, 1 – one- click away from the start screen. Do people really need a tool to avoid 1 -again: one- click? How silly is that.

Greywoof

on Jan 5, 2013

Exactly what I was looking for and something MS should offer in W8 Pro.

JimP

on Jan 5, 2013

Paul, I'm not sure Metro is the future of Windows. I know Sinofsky intended Metro to be the new Windows, but what if nobody's using it? What if, X years from now, 90% of PC users stay on the desktop? WinRT could be another failed platform, like Longhorn or Silverlight.

tlove

on Jan 5, 2013

Without the lifeboat provided by Start8 I would have reverted back to Win7 a while ago. It might not be free anymore, but it's so worth the $4.24 I paid for it.

RonL

on Jan 5, 2013

I installed it and it works as advertised but I can't access the program to change attributes. The icon does not show on desktop. Is it because I have set the computer to log on automatically w/o signing in?

Sterling

on Jan 5, 2013

I'm still on Windows 7 but I like how Start8 adds a Start menu to the taskbar. If you're ongoing through the trouble of installing a program to bring back a feature of the previous version of the OS, you might as well go all the way and put back the Windows 7-style Start menu.

That way you won't have to switch back to the Start screen to launch Windows 7 programs. And if you want to launch a Metro app it's there in the Windows 7-style Start menu.

Spektor

on Jan 5, 2013

What rubbish! The future of computing is what the market demands it looks like! And the market is turning away from W8 in a major way. The UI is an unintuitive, confusing mess with hidden menus and poor useability, and buyers are now desperately having to turn to third-party work-arounds to replace important features arrogantly removed by Microsoft.

If MS doesn't start listening to its consumers and fixes 8 fast, offering a user-chooseable setting for tablet or for dektop, it will cause a fail worse than Vista. And who knows, by then the damage to the brand may be so bad, "the future of computing" may be OSX?

As Marshall Field once said, Give the lady what she wants!

MS does not know better than its potential customers. Period.

johnlavey

on Jan 6, 2013

With all due respect, I can't help but disagree with some of your comments.
The UI is unintuitive? All you have to do is click on a pane.
Hidden menus? You mean the charms bar? It's very convenient and allows you many options such as search, settings, etc.

I personally think that way too much has been made of the new start screen. The hot corners are easy to learn and on top of that Windows 8 is faster than any previous Windows OS. And I have never seen a blue screen in Windows 8. Even Windows 7 was subject to crashes from time to time. It's not perfect, but it's damn good....in my opinion.

Shopko

on Jan 6, 2013

Some things are less convenient than others, but they all violate the user interface design standards that Microsoft required for "Certified for Windows" applications prior to Windows 8. I understand why, since the interface was designed for touch and later retrofitted to be workable with a mouse and keyboard.

For me, the worst was the Metro screen with right-clicking on a tile. The right-click options come up from the bottom of the screen rather than a pop-up menu where the mouse cursor is. On my large monitor, I didn't actually notice the menu come up from the bottom of the screen at first. :) The amount of distance you have to move the mouse cursor for context-sensitive operations is a major UI fail and, as a designer, is actually irritating to me.

My basic feeling is Windows 8 is fair on a tablet. Touch-screen desktops are troublesome because my old shoulders get sore when reaching across the desk to touch something on the screen. For the work that I do, non-touch desktops are far more efficient in Windows 7 than in Windows 8. There is a lot less mouse movement and no full-screen context switches when I want to use the search bar or launch a program from the start menu.

It's all opinion, of course. My nephew, who uses his computer for games and maybe Word every once in a while, loves Windows 8. For me, I use 10-15 different applications daily and have multiple windows up all the time. The fellow designers and engineers I work with universally dislike the Windows 8 interface design. All of us in the office are weary of the idea of dropping the desktop alltogether. If Microsoft heads in that direction, I would seriously consider a move to OS X or Ubuntu.

ScubaDog2008

on Jan 6, 2013

The fallacy of such a statement is proven by how Steve Jobs manufactured demand for the iPhone. There WAS no market for the iPhone and how it operated. However, it eventually did take hold. My own personal opinion is anyone who can't quickly grasp how Windows 8 works as well as see it's potential is a simpleton, stuck in the past. Quit whining and stick with Windows 7, like so many who stuck with WinXP.

rsmith4321

on Jan 5, 2013

I'm a pro photographer and so I'm always using 3 displays and software like Photoshop. I know not everyone is using a PC like myself, and maybe they will be fine with Metro. In fact I have a HTPC and Metro is fine on that single screen use. But I used Win 8 Metro for a couple of months on my desktop and hated it. Once I installed Start8 it was so much better, but it still doesn't do everything a real start menu does. Really, if MS finds a way to force me into the single screen Metro crap I'm going to just stop building my own PCs like I've always done and get a MAC. It's what most people in my line of work have been doing anyway. Saying go back to Windows 7 like many people do is stupid, there are many benefits that have nothing to do with Metro, for one things it's just faster and uses less memory. The future of Windows for some of us will be Mac OS if it keeps going like it is, we don't have to get used to it.

Nozy

on Jan 6, 2013

See my earlier post, a few below yours.

Nozy

ScubaDog2008

on Jan 6, 2013

I have a home music & video podcasting studio, and I run Windows 8 on it as well as another desktop and two laptops. My studio machine runs dual monitors. I don't have a single icon on the Desktop, having moved everything to the Start screen. A number of the programs I use for the studio are legacy and so they do run on the Desktop. I've not run into a single problem with this functions, particularly with dual screens. If I choose, I can easily move active programs to the second screen while I can still use Metro AND Desktop apps on the primary. It's not rocket science. It is no more effort to kick up the Start screen to run programs (of EITHER type) than it is to click the Start button. What you, and others, have failed to do is fully articulate what it is you can't do with Win 8 that you can with Win 7. Are there still some broken pieces in Win 8? You bet. And I'm confident those will improve sooner rather than later. But the quicker I can get rid of the desktop the better, as far as I'm concerned. It will mean more innovation with the Metro side in order to do this. In my personal opinion, I just find people like you stubborn and stuck with old.

vermonter@hotma...

on Jan 5, 2013

The chief problem I have with this is .. why is Microsoft being so friggin' *pigheaded* about this? Why would they care if a paying customer wanted the new OS - but also wanted, having a non-touch device, to just have Windows 8 look exactly like WIndows 7 ... but work better and faster?

I just cannot understand this.

Win8 / Metro completely makes 100% perfect sense to me on my Surface. I get it. But on my current desktop with a 30" screen and *zero* metro apps, why the frakk *not* offer me the new and faster OS, but with the old, well-known, and perfectly useful interface?

Why not just a simple dialog on setting up a new PC or installing the upgrade:

"I see you have a non-touch device. Would you like to:

O - Boot directly to desktop
O - Display the traditional Start Button"

Why - oh why! - are they being so obstinate about this?!?!?

Spektor

on Jan 5, 2013

Sadly, I'm afraid that if users are offered a choice to keep a traditional desktop as the default, MS would no longer be able to leverage the built in advertising included in some Metro applications. Therefore, the incentive is for MS to force everyone to use Metro, whether they want it or not. Cynical, but I presume this is the basis for their insistance everyone be compelled to use Metro, regardless whether desktop PC or tablet.

kuang

on Jan 5, 2013

I want to love the metro UI but honestly I'm in desktop 95% of the time. The only time I go in to the metro UI is when I click a file that opens a metro app by accident. God i hate when that happens.

Microsoft should of brought the surface pro out first and sell at a big loss ( around 600€) just like google does with the nexus and showed the world you can have the best from two worlds. Now the have a beachhead to advance further. A hype and positive reactions on the web. Show the win 8 phone and the surface pro. After a while introduce the regular surface and then move forward to the desktop. Now it's all half assed.

Aldi is a discount supermarket. Kinda like a wallmart but even cheaper and almost all off brand food. On the 9th of January they are going too sell the Lumia 800 for around 189€. they are going to sell a outdated phone to people who don't know anything. Suddenly they can't get a app designed for windows phone 8 and don't know why. I just don't get it at all.

People ask me if thats a good phone:

It's a awesome phone just don't get because it runs windows phone 7.

Why? Isn't windows 7 the current desktop OS.

No. It's windows 8 on the desktop now.

Whats windows 8?

..........

Microsoft is not in a position like Android with a huge market share. You pissed of the early adopters and now you are going to add less tech savvy people to the pool. Stop fumbling the football, guys. It's the fourth quarter and you are three touchdowns behind.

robertw477

on Jan 5, 2013

Vermont. well stated exactly. For the most part the OS install might be able to sense it is not a touchscreen, or by default on various hardware it could be preset. I guarantee they will bend on this and then point fingers at whoever was responsible.

TheWerewolf

on Jan 5, 2013

"Those trying to replace the new Metro-style experiences in Windows 8 are missing the point: These interfaces are the future of the PC, and I feel it’s better to dive right in, learn and master them, and stop pining for obsolete UIs like the Start button and the Start menu."

Well, so much for freemarkets and consumers having a say in what they want.

First off, I'm a little lost by your use of the perjorative "obsolete". It's clearly not obsolete as much as 'abandoned'. A lot of users want it back. That alone makes it 'not obsolete'.

As for this being 'the future of PC' - they jury is still FAR from out on that. Microsoft has backed up on major changes when their customers simply refused to accept it. The reality is that while Metro (screw them, I'm going to keep call it Metro) is quite good on a tablet, and acceptable on a touch monitor, most Windows users will spend most of their time in desktop mode and forcing them back to the 'start' panel isn't a trivial change. It's like having the Start Menu in Win7 automatically snap open and cover the entire screen. If that happened, I suspect you'd be pulling your hair out.

You're also kind of ignoring a basic thing: people buy computers to do work. They build up workflows (often not even realising they've done this) that makes them efficient. This change seriously screws up a lot of people's workflow. Your argument is 'get over it and learn a new workflow' and their answer is 'Why should I? I didn't ask for this... I don't need it... It's not making my work easier - it's making it harder!'

And they're right. It is.

By doing one small thing - Microsoft would help a lot of users - and that's to make the desktop the default mode for systems without touch, and Metro the default mode for those that have it. It's really that simple.

aras

on Jan 5, 2013

Paul, Microsoft is not "the great leader" and we don't live in a totalitarian regime. Customers and market will decide what is future of computing, not Microsoft! Many big products (and companies) have failed, and Microsoft is not in any way different.

I gave metro start screen a good try for a month or two on all my home PCs (despite my wife's protests). It just didn't make any sense on a desktop (nor for me as an IT pro, nor for my wife who couldn't care less about technology). It simply gets in a way and hurts productivity without any real benefits. I then installed Start8 and haven't really seen Metro since.

I will use what makes sense and works best for me, not what Microsoft tells me is "the future". And if enough people do the same your "future" fails. Simple as that...

Boots

on Jan 6, 2013

I wouldn't describe a UI that is used by over 90% of computer users as "obsolete". It's only obsolete when we stop using it. That is unlikely to happen any time soon.
Why does it matter if the Start button is on the taskbar? The purpose of the Taskbar is to place buttons to the things we use most of the time. If you use the Start screen/menu all the time, why not have a button for it? I know that no other Metro apps have a start button, but no other Metro apps have a Taskbar to put it on.
If it makes it easier for people to find the start screen, then what is the problem?
None of the Taskbar's other buttons are hidden off the screen, why is the Start button different?

jumblerr

on Jan 6, 2013

http://www.classicshell.net/ works for me just fine...and free

TedOnWindows8

on Jan 6, 2013

Thanks for the tip.

If not booting directly to the desktop, I think there's a very subtle thing that Microsoft could do to make this Metro nonsense much more bearable for us desktop users: Let us have a hot corner for the Desktop. All they have to do is to make the Desktop be always the first item of the task switcher. It's easy, obvious, and doesn't disrupt the logic of the Metro interface.

Nozy

on Jan 6, 2013

I am using a program called "Classic Shell". It was already out when Windows 8 Update was released. I have been using it since a couple of days after the update. With a few tweaks within settings, it accomplishes the same things as the program Paul mentions, and it is free, and they are constantly updating it. I do not have a touchscreen, and do not plan to get one. I also do not have any mobile devices. I do not even have a cell phone. The Metro Style UI is of no use to me whatsoever. I only updated to Windows 8 because it was cheap, and I wanted access to the internal updates and other features within Windows 8. I don't think that I am the only person out here with a similar situation as mine.

timiteh

on Jan 6, 2013

I find it quite annoying that such software is needed. My favorite software of this type is RetroUI which does what Windows 8 should have done natively: give users choice and adapt the U.I depending of if the device has a touch screen or not. I sincerily can't understand why Windows 8 U.I can adapt itself depending of the P.C. It would have been awesome if Windows 8 can adapt itself to the type of screen (touch or not), number of screen(s), the size of screen(s) and the type of P.C (tablet, laptop or desktop ). Unfortunately, it is not the case and it is extremly disapointing. I expected a much better outcome from Synofsky and Julia Larson Green.

vermonter@hotma...

on Jan 6, 2013

My first thought at installing Win8 on a traditional, non-touch PC was, "my god, this makes roughly as much sense and trying to use my iPad with a friggin' keyboard and mouse."

The key problem is that Microsoft has built an innovative OS, but touch is *essential* to use the Metro interface effectively - even at all. Metro was designed from day one to be a touch interface, and swiping and gesturing using a mouse is simply ridiculous.

I run a medium IT shop (~300 users) and when the Win8 beta appeared, we eagerly installed it and started showing it to users. "What the F is this!?!" was the universal response. "Why am I dragging these big colored squares around!?"

OK, so we show them how to get to the regular desktop; now we gotta fight the "where's the start button?" battle. Even worse, not every installed program puts an icon on the traditional desktop, so they have to flip back and forth to get to their programs instead of just dragging an icon onto the desktop.

And after the official release, the holidays were a nightmare in the IT office. Lots of users got PCs for Christmas, and they're standing in our door with a puzzled look because, again, this *touch* interface is shipping on zillions of non-touch PCs.

Didn't have to be this way. Just offer users *choice* fer chrissakes.

ScubaDog2008

on Jan 6, 2013

Normally, I'd agree. But this case, giving users a choice simply means they'll never learn the new way this is going to work. They won't, it's that simple. Steve Jobs forced people into a new way to operate, whether they recognize it as such. Microsoft needs to do the same. This isn't nearly as drastic as whiners are making it out to be. The problem is there's not been a consistent--and concise--method to show people. Personally, I have figured out a simple methodology and, so far, everyone (including my wife) that I've demonstrated the essential aspects of Windows 8 to has taken to it pretty well. The only ones who don't get it are the ones who are absolutely determined not to change.

aras

on Jan 6, 2013

I somewhat puzzled by Paul's inconsistent standpoint on user choice...
In some articles he asks Microsoft to bring choice back into Windows 8 and let users decide for themselves what works best (which in my opinion always was Windows greatest strength).
In others (or even the same ones) he says screw choice - Microsoft says "this the future" so shut up and use it! And anyone asking for basic choice is a chump clinging to the old-fashioned, obsolete, silly interfaces, etc...

vermonter@hotma...

on Jan 6, 2013

The really puzzling question is:

"What advantage - exactly - does the Metro interface bring to a non-touch, traditional PC?"

On the Surface RT, Metro pays huge dividends - I can use the Surface (with type keyboard and built-in strut) as a laptop replacement - or I can tear off the screen and walk away with an excellent tablet. Desktop is completely impractical on a tablet, of course, but I don't care because I'm really interested in only the Metro apps when I'm in "tablet" mode.

But on a traditional PC, Metro is the poster-child for the phrase, "a solution in search of a problem."

WaltC

on Jan 7, 2013

Exactly. Metro UI is designed for low-power portable devices and everything about the UI is an accommodation to all the compromises portable devices must make in order to conserve power for prolonging battery life (low resolutions, color-depth, cpu performance, etc.) It is assumed, and I think correctly, that with a portable device the customer is interested in something small enough to be called portable, and with a long-enough battery life to properly serve as a portable device is expected to serve.

Desktops, otoh, are unconcerned with both battery life and portability. Their designs revolve around computational power, comfortable keyboards, accurate mouse pointing devices far more fluid and accurate than human fingertips, etc. Along with this for many customers go large monitors and many people have more than one large monitor that they intend on using to the fullest. Desktop customers also expect a certain number of internal expansion bays and slots for the addition of yet more high-performance hardware, from SSDs to hard drives to 2nd and even possibly a 3rd gpu designed to run in tandem, etc. Some desktops need to push multiple printers simultaneously by way of preemptively multitasking several apps simultaneous, and so on.

Windows desktop UI and the Metro UI mix like oil and water. The question that constantly nags at me about all of this is why some people at Microsoft have sworn allegiance to this pagan creed which states as dogma that "everyone" is "transitioning" from desktop computers to portable devices. I see no indication that this will *ever* be the case. The same people ( a couple of billion of them at least) who buy or build desktops today will be buying or building them ten years from now. Desktops aren't going into the trash so that people can buy these relatively anemic portable devices with all kinds of problems and limitations that desktops simply do not have.

Portable devices may enjoy a few years of spikes in sales because of the novelty factor today. And, I can surely see desktop customers buying portable devices in addition to their desktops.

But an either-or situation? No way. I very much doubt that sort of market has much in the way of legs. OTOH, the desktop design paradigm as a form factor has remained steady and ever-increasing over the last three decades. Obviously, desktop computers have a market "staying power" that portable devices are many, many years away (decades away) from achieving. It's entirely possible that the "Dick Tracy Watch Computer" (I had such a toy as a boy) will come along and blow the iPad and pals right out of the water in terms of customer interest and participation. But no matter what portables do, desktop computers are always going to serve a very large segment of the market.

So...after having built its company establishing the desktop, along with companies like Intel and AMD, why is Microsoft suddenly so sure and certain that people want to throw all of that away just to use something in a completely different hardware category--like these portable devices? Somebody at Microsoft has fallen asleep at the switch.

Be smart, Microsoft. Build software for your desktop customers and software for your portable device customers so that they can all be content with what they purchase from you. Don't try to shoehorn desktop software onto portable devices and don't try to dumb down desktop computers by slapping on very weak and anemic portable-device software.

Microsoft--incredibly--has lost sight of its market demographics. But why? How could a company so successful in computer sales with its software suddenly become so soft in the head? I think it's because somebody high up has been rattled because of Apple's device sales and has lost his mind in a panic and has tried to emulate what Apple is doing--while strangely having overlooked the fact that Apple's current success has more to do with cell phones than it does with computer software--much more. Microsoft's forte' has always been with desktop computer software.

I'm not advocating the company abandon its new portable market--absolutely not! I just want it to give desktop software users the kinds of options and UIs they like; while doing the same for Windows portable device customers. We speak of two different markets here and Microsoft had better catch on to the reality of that. It is not going to change. Only thing that will change is that many of Microsoft's present customers may be forced to find new sources for their software because Microsoft won't be selling what they want to buy anymore.

ScubaDog2008

on Jan 6, 2013

The answer: Exposure to the future of Windows. Windows 8 is, without a doubt, a transitional phase. It doesn't take everyone and just dump them into Metro. People MUST understand this. I have Windows 8 on two laptops and two desktops, one of which is my music and video podcast workstation w/dual monitors. I have absolutely ZERO problems moving between the two interfaces. In fact, the smartest thing one can do is take EVERY icon off the desktop and pin what you need to the Start screen. Create your groups there as necessary. I QUICKLY grasped the use of keyboard and mouse to use Metro. Of course, there was zero learning curve on the desktop side. I am convinced that neither Microsoft nor developers have fully exploited live tiles and hubs. These must REPLACE most legacy programs being opened. If a live tile is properly designed it should show the most common, critical info that people keep a desktop program open for. Then you dive into it if you need to go "active". In the meantime, as the Metro apps are maturing, I use them more than desktop apps.

Kyn1000

on Jan 7, 2013

I'll echo other posters and recommend Classic Shell.

That said, Metro on the desktop or laptop is a huge mistake, in my opinion. http://www.sigchi.org/chi96/proceedings/desbrief/Sullivan/kds_txt.htm

Skip to the Separate UI for beginners. Looks like Microsoft lost or forgot about this document. Competing interfaces on the same system (and Metro vs desktop are really competing, command line and a GUI don't compete in my opinion, but that's something else entirely) are not beneficial to users and only serve to cause confusion and make life more difficult.

Touch first is a mistake. I do not want to use touch on my laptop or desktop. I do not want fingerprints all over my screen. Not only that, when I'm at my desk, I'm about two feet away from my screen, not two inches like in the Angry Birds commercial. And Metro on Windows Server 2012 is even worse. If I'm in front of a server rack, I certainly don't have a touch based KVM screen, if I have any at all.

I can only hope that Microsoft comes to their senses and either fixes this in a service pack or in Windows 9. But I'm not sure they will because I suspect they're trying to lock people in to the Metro UI to try and increase their tablet and phone market share.

If this keeps up, I'll have to consider jumping ship to Linux.

tinkererguy

on Jan 7, 2013

Focusing on the implementation side instead of the philosophical side of this dialogue for a moment, I've found that for the corporate world, finding a Windows-native way to do such a UI tweak tends to be vastly preferred over 3rd party tools.

There is just such a way out there, which seems to have no adverse side-effects, nor should it. It's just 2 lines of text, run from either the startup folder, or via Task Scheduler, detailed at:
http://www.windows7hacker.com/index.php/2012/06/how-to-switch-to-desktop...

Of course, the Metro-style UI is still there (and visible briefly at login), invoked with the good old Windows key or button.

This technique is also helpful when creating a golden master template Windows 8 virtual machine, that I detailed as part of a build procedure here:
http://tinkertry.com/esxi-5-1-create-golden-master-windows-8-template

jerryyyyy

on Jan 7, 2013

Hello, I checked this software with https://www.virustotal.com/ and it was clean.

BUT, last week Paul recommended Classic Shell. This I also scanned last week and was clean.

BUT BUT, there was a suggested update to "Classic Shell" this AM. When scanning it came up with a trojan.

Please confirm this finding, if you are using that program and watch out.

Cheers (my first post here)

WaltC

on Jan 7, 2013

I've used every version of Classic Shell since 3.6.2 (now running 3.6.5) and none of them shows up any sort of malware through Defender, Windows 8' native malware program (know as Microsoft Security Essentials in Win7, only the standard Defender version is supposed to be better in WIn8 than MSE was in Win7.)

If you are running Windows 8 and you wish to run another malware program you *must* turn off Defender prior to doing so. A big no-no is running more than a single AV/Malware program at the same time. What happens in that instance is that things get screwed up and a lot of false positives may appear, or else the capacity of both programs to detect and deal with V/Malware is diminished. I would scan the file again with Windows 8 Defender (which you can run from the control panel--I have a shortcut on my desktop.) Bet you won't see a positive if you do that...;) IMO, "virustotal.com" doesn't compare with Win8 Defender in terms of efficacy against bad software. Use Defender. But if you prefer something else, that's fine, just make sure to turn off Defender first.

Some people might be tempted to think that as two heads are often better than one, so are two AV/anti-malware programs better than one. But it just ain't so...;) Good luck!

sopwith

on Jan 7, 2013

If Win8 / Metro is the 'future' then Microsoft should have completely left desktop mode out of it - it's as simple as that.

Throwing a token desktop mode in to try and artificially inflate user base #s and/or upgrade revenue was pointless.

Apple is supporting 2 simultaneous independent operating systems / usage paradigms with a much better strategy to transition their user base to the 'future' (software and hardware of their choosing).

If MS wants growth from a closed system they should be using XBOX...not the PC.

An XBOX tablet accessing the XBOX store, running XBOX apps on an XBOX UI would sell a lot more than Surface...

dhscrugco

on Jan 7, 2013

I will ignore, or "not worry about this utility". The W8 start screen appears almost instantly when I turn my computer on and I either make one click to go to the desktop, or I launch a metro app. I know what I'm going to do before I turn the machine on. Why add complexity to wonderful new way to do things?

SteveM

on Jan 8, 2013

There are a number of problems with the current implementation of Windows 8 and it's Jeckyll&Hyde interfaces. Not the least of which is discover-ability. Good UI design means being able to easily discover how to do something, or if you do something unexpected, to get back to where you were with little effort.

The new "Metro-style" interface is significantly flawed in this respect. A user can discover by trying many different things, but many users will be fear exploration because they fear doing damage to their computer.

Also, I completely disagree with Paul and others who believe that the Desktop interface will be gone in a couple of years. If so, how will multi-tasking be done at the UI level? I'm not talking about simply switching back and forth between apps, but also the ability to see multiple apps at the same time. For instance when doing many kinds of content work (graphics animation, code development, editting a book, etc, etc.) it is best if one can see more than one window at a time. Few of you probably ever saw and fewer remember the original Windows 1 interface from 1983. This was a tiled interface in which windows could not overlap at all. Look it up. This interface proved completely unworkable and was abandoned in favor of the current desktop paradigm with overlapping windows that can be moved and resized as the user needs. Usability and productivity studies showed that the modern "windows" interface was superior to those other attempts in nearly every case.

I understand why MS shoved the Metro UI on us with no option to go back to the classic desktop with Start button. Not because they found it to be superior, but because they want everyone to get used to the Metro UI. Once the user has that familiarity, they are more likely to purchase a Windows phone or Surface tablet as their next mobile device. Its a big bet that MS is making, but one that is filled with tremendous risk of alienating users.

My prediction is that the Desktop will not go away, or if it does, we can assume Microsoft is getting out of the Desktop/laptop market in favor of mobile devices.

George

on Feb 26, 2013

If I have multiple user accounts setup up on my machine. Is there anyway to control which user account comes up during startup before going to the classic desktop? With Skip Start Screen enabled it always goes to my secondary user account and not the primary one which is the administrator account.

itzzitzz

on Mar 12, 2013

Many computers have no keyboard or mouse and need to run a program when booted. You cannot see the program because the metro screen is hiding it. Think of airport displays, menu display boards.

Mike Nixon

on Mar 26, 2013

I recently "upgraded" to Windows 8: only because the laptop I purchased had it pre-installed. Played around with it for a few days, and simply removed it and replaced with Linux Mint. If Microsoft feels it necessary to dictate to customers such as me, and thinks we are stupid/archaic, then I have news for them: there IS life after Windows. Instead of having to download 3rd party apps to make Windows 8 look the way you want, have a look out there: many operating systems that are free, open source, and leave the choice of appearance totally up to the customer. Go with the times: competition, free choice = good; monopoly, closed source, dictatorial attitude = bad!!

pthurrott

on Mar 26, 2013

This is a ridiculous comment and I'm only posting it to make a point.

I will not be doing so again. Please don't reply to this troll. Linux is not an option. Period.

mats

on Apr 16, 2013

The main question is: Does Win8 give us as organisation anything that motivates the cost of upgrading and retraining our users? For my organisation, the answer is No. We can not see a return of investment in five years on win 8 mostly due to costs related to the new UI.

Therefore we had two alternatives left. going Linux with a win7 like skin (even sccm can do some Linux management today) or staying on W7/office 2010. Now it seems there might be some hope for 8.1 to restore the startmenu and giving us a third option.

Discuss this Article 48

Please Log In or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Office 365 InfoCenter

What I Use

What I Use: On the Road 21

What I Use: March 2013 33

WinSuperSite.com

Site Features

Penton

Follow Paul

Search WinSuperSite.com

Related Penton Sites

Windows 8 Tip: Boot Directly to the Desktop with Skip Metro Suite

Discuss this Article 48

Please Log In or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Office 365 InfoCenter

What I Use

What I Use: On the Road 21

What I Use: March 2013 33

WinSuperSite.com

Site Features

Penton

Follow Paul

Search WinSuperSite.com

Related Penton Sites