Ok, I am trying Vista *_AGAIN_* - Question with Start Menu "Sort by Name"

Ok. I am going back to try Vista and will try to minimize my whining. I have installed Service Pack 1. An hour later after HDD crunching, all is fine.

Ok, so basic functionality. Start menu. I do "Sort by Name" and all my folders pop to the bottom of the menu. WTF? Is there a way to change it so that my folders appear at the TOP of the menu like in XP, 2000, ME, 98, 95...

Simple question, hoping for a simple answer. Thanks.

 

You can just unclick "Sort All Programs menu by name" and move all your folders to the top of the menu.

 

you mean that your window looks like that?


just click on the Name (highlighted with orange in my theme) to make it look like this



it's the same for XP and Vista

 

oh, wait... you talk about Start Menu... Just choose "Sort by name" once again

 

This is what you did?

 

yes, but folders are always at the bottom. I want them at the top. If you click and drag, but select "sort by name" it moves them back to the bottom again.

 

This is what he means btw:
http://i30.tinypic.com/2j1alg3.jpg

EDIT: Had to remove image tags: it was too big

 

Dude..please tell me that ur using some type of skin for ur OS and thats not actually Windows ME.

 

^ Don't make me cry more than I have to already.
Jumping to Vista is gonna be great - regardless of what flaws it may have, it'll seem infinitely more stable from my point of view.
It's not actually that bad though, it gets a lot of bad press. We have a 98box too (they're both freebies - why spend money when you don't need to), and they are pretty much the same, 'cept ME has native generic USB drivers.

Only problem is finding software that'll run on:
1.3 Ghz AMD Athlon Proc
128MB RAM
16 Gig HDD
Riva TNT Video Card 64MB

 

16Gb HDD??????? i feel some sympathy here... My old Athlon 2GHz (2400+) destop had 250Gb+160Gb in it... not to mention the original 40Gig when it had Duron 900MHz

 

My XP laptop has 100+250GB

My Vista laptop has 160GB HDD.

 

I would say just give up because it's not worth it. The Vista start menu is not really meant to be used by scrolling through looking for things to click on. You should instead use it by first pressing the "Windows" key so it comes up, then start typing part of the name of the program you are looking for. It will come right up, then you can click on it.

 

Did you first right click on the start menu, select properties, click on customize, scroll to the bottom, and deselect Sort All Programs menu by name, before you started moving things around?

 

Yes and as he explained, the auto-sort thing just resorts it back with the folders at the bottom. I too dislike this change and wish they left it be. But as someone else mentioned, it's best to just give up on the Vista start menu since it's pretty much designed for the Google generation. (e.g. type a query, browse the results instead of just knowing where what you want is & going straight to it.) It's frustrating, I don't use so many applications that I need a search engine to figure out the one I want, but I've sort of given up & assume Vista is just a place where I need double or triple the keystrokes to get the same thing done.

 

Actually, the OP never stated he deselected that option.

 

Then let me state that I've tried it and the programs still sort above the folders instead of below as in previous versions of Windows.

That said, to the OP, switch to Classic View - it's ugly in the sense that it totally fails to blend in with the rest of the Vista look, but the start menu reverts to the exact same behavior as XP... sort behavior and all.

 

swiego - yeah, I did try all sorts of things, and found the Classic View as well. Stupid that they didn't offer the option of classic style Start menu with Vista look.

I know you should use the "search" parameter and such, but you don't always remember everything that's on your PC. I have tons of games, apps, and other software that is so much easier and quicker to drive thru menus. It's all about minimal keystrokes. If you have to always use keyboard, it's much less efficient than a few strokes of the wrist and click of the mouse.

Either way, why would they change this? Or at least offer an option for both. Kind of stupid IMHO.

 

Exactly what bothers you about having the folders at the bottom? I actually prefer this default behavior. It's nice having the shortcuts at the top, so I don't have to constantly scroll to the bottom of the list to bypass all of the folders. Even in XP I moved the shortcuts out of the folders, as I hated navigating through folders to get to the program shortcut.

 

Ok, that's fine for you, but not for me. It's the whole point. This is has been the same through 13 years of Windows useage with Windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, and XP. Now they change it for no good reason, and people chastise me for thinking it's annoying. It should be at the very least, a selectable option.

Again, it's MS forcing you to work it the way they want you to, not how you're cofortable.

 

Use the search bar like it's meant to >_>

 

I disagree... I think Vista's start menu is designed to be used either way. I probably navigate it with the mouse about half the time, and search the other half.


Anyway, I'm perfectly fine with having the programs above the folders, and I also second kegobeer's suggestion of moving (or copying) shortcuts outside of the folders.

But I also agree that UI customization is one of Vista's weak spots. (Although I don't remember whether this was actually customizable in XP, or if it was just different in XP.) Plenty of things are customizable in Vista, but some things, oddly, just aren't.

 

I don't think the problem is that Vista is less customizable than XP was; XP wasn't very flexible either. The problem is that Vista changed a lot of things not because it was better, but simply because it was different. Whenever I use Vista, I have images of a company with too many employed programmers, one whose management is searching under every rock for ways to keep all those people busy by giving them lots of little changes to incorporate into the design for no particular reason other than to keep them occupied. For someone who has used Windows since the day of the August '95 Windows 95 launch, a random change like this, with no effective way to switch back, is very frustrating. It gives the whole OS a bad feel, since we're giving up so much usability and familiarity, but not getting anything particularly innovative (WinFS?) in return

Anyway, the Classic menu turned out to be a dead end; it's missing several key things like the Games menu, which opens a separate panel that doesn't list any newly installed games.

 

WinFS never made it into Vista, but a lot of the benefits WinFS was going to bring ended up making it into Vista anyway. Search indexing, tagging, and metadata provide ways to search, group, sort, and filter your files pretty much along the lines of what WinFS was going to do. See the image below for an example.

I'm sure WinFS would've been more advanced in some ways, but still...

As for defaults being different... I don't know, I don't mind a bit that some defaults were changed, although it does bother me when they don't provide adequate ways to change the defaults. I agree that Classic start menu is disappointing. It's a bit too "Classic", and there's no search box.

 

Have you tried sorting the folders name manually after you moved them to the top? Leave the "Sort by name" unchecked. Mine stay at the top.

 

You could put the shortcuts inside folders alternatively...

 

+1 to using the start search.

But then again, the menu is there for a reason. Like going into a resturaunt. Sometimes you know exactly what you want so you just turn to the waiter and say what you want and he gives it to the cooking staff. Sometimes you have no idea what you want so you scroll through the menu and decide what you want?

 

Exactly. Vista seems designed for people who have no idea what they want to order: no idea what programs are installed on their computer, no idea what files are on their computer, where they are nor what they contain! Which is fine, but the few of us who actually had a good handle on the 3 applications and 50 files we need access to are stuck using the "let's turn the start menu into a mini google replete with inexact search results!" approach of Vista.

The menu as it existed in XP was just about perfect. It didn't try to hide things through scrolling. Like any restaurant menu, it simply presented everything in a logical order. I'm not opposed to to a complementary search capability but I feel that it should not be front-and-center in the piece of the OS which is the point of entry for doing work. Or, if it is, that should be an option I can turn off.

 

If you only use 3 applications then those will float to the top on the main start menu, and you won't have to search through all programs for them at all.

 

swiego - For some reason people are missing our point. We have the same issue. It's been the same Start menu for 13 years. Then MS goes and changes it for no good reason, or even a way to use it the way people are familiar with it.

 

There was a good reason, it was because the old start menu got huge when you had a bunch of programs installed, and it also get very disorganized. It could take ages to open and would cover your whole screen if you have a lot of things installed.

You can choose the "Classic Start Menu" in the properties if you want it.

 

Microsoft is moving forward, trying to compete with Apple and the other operating systems. The start menu is but one of the many new interfaces introduced by Vista. You are making an assumption that "MS goes and changes it for no good reason", unless you work for Microsoft and have some insider information that you'd like to share with the group. Apparently the huge alpha and beta tester groups were happy with the the new start menu.

This is another "damned if you do, damned if you don't" point with Microsoft. If they hadn't changed the start menu, people would have complained that Microsoft neglected to bring a fresh look to the start menu. Based on the extremely small number of people that have heartburn over the new start menu (based on a day's worth of Googling for similar complaints), I'd say that the majority of Vista users either don't care or are extremely happy with the new look.

 

No doubt, I wish there was more customizability in the Start menu.

 

You assume too much about MS making good decisions. I'm not object to the new Start Menu, but why no option? Surely this would not be a difficult task to add that additional check box option with the simple algorithm to sort reverse direction.

It's somewhat akin to auto makers moving the "D" position to the "R" position in an automatic transmission. Sure you can adjust to it eventually, but after driving with the "D" and "R" position in the same spot since you've been driving for the last 30 years, and you use it every time you drive, it's a little perplexing why it would be changed.

BTW, in your sig for "New to forums, you should really view this video", this is a 20 year old video rehashed with new games... getting a little long in the tooth.

 

I didn't make any assumptions regarding Microsoft making a good decision. I said that you made an assumption that Microsoft didn't have a good reason to change the start menu. Haven't you also objected to the way the new start menu works? Since I'm not a programmer assigned to the Vista project, I don't have the knowledge to comment on whether or not it would've been too difficult to add options to the sort/display subroutines. However, I can make a guess that apparently it wasn't too important in the eyes of whoever made the final call on the subroutine.

Your analogy is quite funny. I don't know how you made a jump from "different operating systems with different menu systems" to "the same automatic transmission shift system used by all auto manufacturers". If every single GUI operating system used the exact same menu system, and they all changed, the transmission analogy would still be a stretch, IMHO.

This is more akin to one TV manufacturer suddenly deciding to change the location of the volume up/down buttons on a particular remote, after having all volume buttons in the same place on all of their remotes.

 

People don't like change, and will always complain about it.

 

Except (*ahem* usually) when it has the name Apple in it.

 

People also complain when there is no change. People just complain regardless.

 

I've noticed that.

 

I remember this old story my grandma told me from Bangladesh. Its about how you can never satisfy everyone.

So a farmer and his son bought a small mule and are walking it back to their farm but its a long walk. They are tired and sweaty and along the way 2 men see them and say to each other "what idiots, they could just ride it." They overhear this and so they both get on. Then a woman passes by and sees the mule struggling and says "how cruel of them". So the father gets off and tells just the son to ride. Then an older man passes by and says "what a disrespectful boy, he should let his father ride". The boy gets off and in the end they carry the mule back to the farm.