Classic Start Menu

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to end up
with two Start buttons.

On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie" wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to end up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu



--
----------------
Stubbo of Oz
----------------

"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie" wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take
in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options
available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to end
up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu


But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

"Fred" wrote in message
...

"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie" wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look
like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take
in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options
available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to end
up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu


But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.


That is a matter of opinion..

--

Mike Hall - MVP Windows Experience
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/

"Mike Hall - MVP" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
...

"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie" wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look
like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all
it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take
in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options
available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to
end up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu


But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.


That is a matter of opinion..

--

Mike Hall - MVP Windows Experience
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/

No, he's right, it ain't broke. It may not be what a lot of people want
(myself included), but I wouldn't consider it broke.

If I had stayed with the default XP start menu when it first came out
instead of changing it to Classic, I probably would be a bit more
comfortable and proficient with the Win7 one. But I still run Classic on my
XP box, and am pretty much used to Win7 one.
I did progress some with Vista, though- I had a combo *******ized set up
between Vista Default and Classic LOL!

All in all, I don't think the Win7 menu is as bad as the Vista one was. I'll
keep this one, I think.
--
SC Tom

On 07/01/10 04:35, Fred wrote:

"Stubbo of wrote:

"Rod wrote:

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take
in creating a "classic" start menu?

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

Depends on your opinion, lack of classic start menu would certainly
prevent (or delay) my installation of Win7, Microsoft should learn to
give people what they want, rather than what *they* think we should have.

Bravo to Ivo Beltchev.

"Sunny Bard" wrote in message
...
On 07/01/10 04:35, Fred wrote:

"Stubbo of wrote:

"Rod wrote:

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to
take
in creating a "classic" start menu?

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

Depends on your opinion, lack of classic start menu would certainly
prevent (or delay) my installation of Win7, Microsoft should learn to give
people what they want, rather than what *they* think we should have.


Which doesn't explain what is broken or how.

Sunny Bard wrote:
On 07/01/10 04:35, Fred wrote:

"Stubbo of wrote:

"Rod wrote:

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to
take in creating a "classic" start menu?

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

Depends on your opinion, lack of classic start menu would certainly
prevent (or delay) my installation of Win7, Microsoft should learn to
give people what they want, rather than what *they* think we should have.


Amen to that. But it happens with everything.

Take IE8 - the main issue with IE7 was security, so MS needed to fix that
with IE8. Fine. But they decided it was necessary to redesign it and add
"Feechas". Now that wouldn't have been so bad if they would have added one
more option - "Make IE8 look and behave like my IE7 setup". With that, I
could have lived with IE8, and maybe slowly changed to its new ways and
appearance. But that option wasn't there, and I couldn't get it to look
like the IE7 I was familiar with. So I uninstalled it.

Now I've got Win7, I've got IE8. I still don't like it, and will install
Firefox or Opera. The latter will also give me a basic email & newsreader,
if I install WLM and don't like it.

--
Jeff

"Jeff Layman" wrote in message
...
Sunny Bard wrote:
On 07/01/10 04:35, Fred wrote:

"Stubbo of wrote:

"Rod wrote:

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to
take in creating a "classic" start menu?

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

Depends on your opinion, lack of classic start menu would certainly
prevent (or delay) my installation of Win7, Microsoft should learn to
give people what they want, rather than what *they* think we should have.


Amen to that. But it happens with everything.

Take IE8 - the main issue with IE7 was security, so MS needed to fix that
with IE8. Fine. But they decided it was necessary to redesign it and add
"Feechas". Now that wouldn't have been so bad if they would have added one
more option - "Make IE8 look and behave like my IE7 setup". With that, I
could have lived with IE8, and maybe slowly changed to its new ways and
appearance. But that option wasn't there, and I couldn't get it to look
like the IE7 I was familiar with. So I uninstalled it.

Now I've got Win7, I've got IE8. I still don't like it, and will install
Firefox or Opera. The latter will also give me a basic email &
newsreader, if I install WLM and don't like it.

--
Jeff

I can't see any difference between IE 7 and IE 8. But anyway you can install
mozilla Thunderbird for email and newgroups without installing firefox. You
don't need the whole package.

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 17:35:09 +1300, "Fred"
wrote:


"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie" wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take
in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options
available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to end
up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu


But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

BUT, if you spend a minute to think about it, it isn't a matter of
being broke or not!! I never said it was broke.

It is a matter of personal preferences. I do not like the new style
menu - I prefer the classic one.

You, on the other hand, are quite entitled to prefer the new one.


--
----------------
Stubbo of Oz
----------------

"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 17:35:09 +1300, "Fred"
wrote:


"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie" wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of
thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7 look
like
my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One look was all
it
took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to take
in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options
available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want to
end
up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu


But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

BUT, if you spend a minute to think about it, it isn't a matter of
being broke or not!! I never said it was broke.

It is a matter of personal preferences. I do not like the new style
menu - I prefer the classic one.

You, on the other hand, are quite entitled to prefer the new one.

But you're not the original poster, who doesn't like fixing things that aint
broke. For what it's worth I don't really have a preference but certainly
can't see anything wrong with W7 or XP. Neither are broke - but W7 is
faster.

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:14:51 -0600, Andy wrote:

Stubbo of Oz wrote:

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 17:35:09 +1300, "Fred"
wrote:


"Stubbo of Oz" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 21:32:25 -0600, "Rod Munsie"
wrote:

As a firm believer in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school
of thought, I'm slowly working to make my new laptop with Windows 7
look like my desktop with XP. (Yes, I completely skipped Vista. One
look was all it took.)

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to
take in
creating a "classic" start menu? I know there are several options
available
and likely some are better than others. For instance, I don't want
to end up
with two Start buttons.


I am using the free program "Classic Start Menu" from he-

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

It's really good - been running it for a few weeks now without
problems and its just like the old XP classic menu


But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

BUT, if you spend a minute to think about it, it isn't a matter of
being broke or not!! I never said it was broke.

It is a matter of personal preferences. I do not like the new style
menu - I prefer the classic one.

You, on the other hand, are quite entitled to prefer the new one.


I visited sourceforget.net (pun intended out of curiosity. Does it
comply with the T,L,B,R task bar positioning?

I didn't install it, being a beta software.

Does it play nice with the various taskbar positions?


It seems to work equally well when task bar it top, left, right or
bottom but I did not leave it at any position othre than bottom for
very long.




--
----------------
Stubbo of Oz
----------------

"Jeff Layman" wrote in message
...
Sunny Bard wrote:
On 07/01/10 04:35, Fred wrote:

"Stubbo of wrote:

"Rod wrote:

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to
take in creating a "classic" start menu?

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

Depends on your opinion, lack of classic start menu would certainly
prevent (or delay) my installation of Win7, Microsoft should learn to
give people what they want, rather than what *they* think we should have.


Amen to that. But it happens with everything.

Take IE8 - the main issue with IE7 was security, so MS needed to fix that
with IE8. Fine. But they decided it was necessary to redesign it and add
"Feechas". Now that wouldn't have been so bad if they would have added one
more option - "Make IE8 look and behave like my IE7 setup". With that, I
could have lived with IE8, and maybe slowly changed to its new ways and
appearance. But that option wasn't there, and I couldn't get it to look
like the IE7 I was familiar with. So I uninstalled it.

Now I've got Win7, I've got IE8. I still don't like it, and will install
Firefox or Opera. The latter will also give me a basic email &
newsreader, if I install WLM and don't like it.

--
Jeff


I agree with Fred on this- I have IE8 on Win7 and IE7 on XP and don't see
that much difference. The "Add to Favorites" icon is gone, and a new tab
brings up a lot of crap info AFAIC, but other than that, they act the same
for me.
--
SC Tom

"SC Tom" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Layman" wrote in message
...
Sunny Bard wrote:
On 07/01/10 04:35, Fred wrote:

"Stubbo of wrote:

"Rod wrote:

Does anyone have any strong recommendations as to which approach to
take in creating a "classic" start menu?

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/

But you're trying to fix something that aint broke.

Depends on your opinion, lack of classic start menu would certainly
prevent (or delay) my installation of Win7, Microsoft should learn to
give people what they want, rather than what *they* think we should
have.


Amen to that. But it happens with everything.

Take IE8 - the main issue with IE7 was security, so MS needed to fix that
with IE8. Fine. But they decided it was necessary to redesign it and
add "Feechas". Now that wouldn't have been so bad if they would have
added one more option - "Make IE8 look and behave like my IE7 setup".
With that, I could have lived with IE8, and maybe slowly changed to its
new ways and appearance. But that option wasn't there, and I couldn't
get it to look like the IE7 I was familiar with. So I uninstalled it.

Now I've got Win7, I've got IE8. I still don't like it, and will install
Firefox or Opera. The latter will also give me a basic email &
newsreader, if I install WLM and don't like it.

--
Jeff


I agree with Fred on this- I have IE8 on Win7 and IE7 on XP and don't see
that much difference. The "Add to Favorites" icon is gone, and a new tab
brings up a lot of crap info AFAIC, but other than that, they act the same
for me.


Add to favorites is still there on IE8.

Fred wrote:
(snip)

I can't see any difference between IE 7 and IE 8. But anyway you can
install mozilla Thunderbird for email and newgroups without installing
firefox. You don't need the whole package.

You can't? This is what I posted last March to
public.microsoft.internetexplorer.general:

++++++++++++

1. I can't combine toolbars on one line. To save wasted space, I used to
have the Links bar on the RHS of the Command bar (with Spoofstick in the
middle). No longer possible with IE8. To be fair, Opera can't do this
either.

2. In the same vein the "Find" box no longer floats but adds yet another bar
to reduce the screen page size. The IE7 floating box could be put above the
page if necessary to avoid blocking the page content (ie restricting the
toolbars, but that didn't matter whilst using "Find").

3. The half-hearted attempt at showing spoof addresses by highlighting the
domain name whilst greying out the rest of the address. This is really
annoying if I want to select part of the address, which is now much less
visible against the white address background. If you want to see how this
should be done, just load the BHO "Spoofstick".

None of the above can be turned off or made an option to behave like they
did in IE7. Why?

I must say that I don't have much use for accelerators or web slices, but
can see how others could find these very useful. But these are options
which can (more or less) be turned off.

And I like the idea of linked tabs showing up in one colour. But I found
that it was now hard to tell which tab marked the open page on screen.
Sure, there was always the "x" to see. Previously, without this linking
facility the open tab was white, whilst all the others were grey. Now the
open tab's distinguishing marking (apart from the "x") is that the bottom
10% of it is grey. Why not make it all white with the bottom part coloured?
Much more obvious.

+++++++++++++++

AFAIAA nothing has changed with IE8 since I posted the above, unless there
are some third-party fixes available. In fact, with laptops moving to
widescreen from 4:3, and showing less vertically, points 1 and 2 are even
more relevant.

--
Jeff