In practice, none of this comes close to compensating for the slower usage of the start screen vs. start menu, if only for the visually jarring effect it has. Additionally, normal document-oriented usage is considerably less practical since they removed the Recent files and the (implicit) recent/most used applications list from the start interface. Then there's the time lost due to unintended edge-pulls and hotcorners.

Interop between modern and classic is still terrible - no windowed modern apps (nor for that matter modern-docked classic apps), and start search is split by app type (as is so much of the UI).

The modern UI also suffers from not allowing renaming of apps, especially since so many apps+settings come in modern and classic flavors. Is that blaryscroo app in the search results the modern or classic variant? The icon looks plain, maybe that means it's modern? This is basically app-starting by trial-and error. If you try to rename the less-useful blaryscroo modern version to something like "blaryscroo (modern)"... well, you can't. Want to right-click the app for traditional options such as recently-opened files by that app - you can't do that either in the start screen.

All in all, for practical plain, boring, actually getting-things-done windows 8.1 simply hasn't made much of difference vs. windows 8, and it's made a rather negative difference vs. windows 7.

Don't get me wrong - I'm happier with boot-to-desktop than without it, but frankly, booting isn't where I spend most of my time, and then you're left with the fact that the start screen is really just a slightly larger, slower start menu - and the rest of the OS is a usability disaster for desktop usage. Despite the hype, windows 8.1 was virtually irrelevant for desktop usage.

Downvoter: care to explain why you feel this is inaccurate?

I didn't downvote you, but I can only speak from personal experience that I haven't found the start screen to be any slower vs. the start menu.

None of the negatives you mention apply to my usecase (I don't typically rename shortcuts, nor did I ever use the recent files functionality etc.)

But what I do find is that the start screen is faster for opening the application I'm looking for: I'm either searching for a particular name as with the start menu, where the speed is about the same, or I'm browsing around looking for something whose name I can't remember, for which I find my groupings of smart tiles far easier to parse in a quick glance than I ever found navigating a directory structure in the start menu.

A directory tree to open applications still seems a bit like a holdover from the filesystem design, rather than an interface that's been designed for the purpose of finding the right application fastest.

not the downvoter, but my 2c: > if only for the visually jarring effect it has I don't find the effect jarring in the slightest, actually. there's a gentle fade into the background and then the tiles fade in, which I find quite easy on the eyes.

> since they removed the Recent files I work with my apps pinned to taskbar. If I want to open my last VS solution, I right click on VS and click the top icon, which is the recent list? Maybe there was another recent list.

> Interop between modern and classic is still terrible I agree here, in fact I would go as far as to say it's non existent, although I'm not 100% sure what sort of interaction I would expect between them. Allowing the metro apps access to more functionality would reduce the sandbox level in WinRT, so that's not going to happen. The only way I can see it happening is if MS give desktop apps access ti metro/modern app data, which is a privacy nightmare, so I don't know what the solution here is. I'd be interested in hearing one though.

> no windowed modern apps Article says all MS universal apps will be windowed going forward, so I guess that means they're backing down on this.

> start search is split by app type don't know what you mean here. If I type in "Evernote", I get Evernote(desktop App) Evernote(text file I have named evernote) Evernote(Metro App)

> The modern UI also suffers from not allowing renaming of apps. Rename the classic ones so?

> but frankly, booting isn't where I spend most of my time

Where do you spend most of your time? By the sounds of your criticisms, searching among the number of metro and classic apps you have installed, on the metro screen? I don't know about you, but 95% of my time is spent with FF, visual studio, spotify, sourcetree and 3DS max open, none of which are affected by the metro interface, so nothing has changed for me.

The only complaint people have is the start screen for Windows 8, which seems to more be a case of "I like the start menu", although as you state there is some missing functionality re: recent files. But what about the improvements?

My boot time was cut substantially, I'm on my desktop(including going via the start screen because I like booting to it and seeing the live update travel tile and looking forward to my next holdiay) in ~ 8 seconds.

Much better multiple monitor support, for backgrounds, multi-taskbars.

Built in reset and restore settings.

File History: this is awesome. Works like time machine for OSX and is a major upgrade over Backup and Restore.

I've also noticed my usage is snappier than it was on 7, and an increase in battery life on my MBP ( I run bootcamp).

Built in ISO mounting (bye bye wincdemu) is also cool. Overall, I'm happy, and won't be changing back.

Oh yeah, there are definitely technical advances, and they're not trivial. But they just don't compensate for the UI issues, and those are problematic.

e.g. on the interaction front, I'm not talking about technical interaction, but UI interaction - there's no reason metro apps can't run in a window nor classic apps can't run in fullscreen, even if their design won't be optimal for the non-normal UI. As is, you're forced to use two quite different UI's intermixed with one another. (Task-switching between classic+modern is problematic too).

I spend most of my time in and switching among the application I use to work/play in. I think the worst missing feature is the missing recent files/applications feature which means that ad-hoc workloads with various single-purpose tools are quite unhandy. It's not just recent files: the same thing counts for recent programs. Win7 provides taskbar (and start) pinning for your really common programs. Win8 provides start customization. But for the rest - the stuff you organically happen to use a lot for a particular task - Win8 has no alternative to the win7 recent programs.

Boot time: that's nice, but I really don't care very much - my old boot time was less than 30s, and now it's probably even less - but how often do you reboot?

I haven't noticed the multi-monitor support being better, what's the advantage?

In any case: there's no doubt that win8 has numerous technical advancements - and frankly, I like the modern interface. That makes it all the more aggravating that the UI is such a haphazard mess. The problem isn't modern - it's how they've done virtually no work in coordinating between the two UIs. If good integration is impossible, I'd even rather just have a mode-switch: render everything in classic mode, or everything in modern, regardless of what the app was really designed for.