You are talking from a business perspective, while most computers are used at the consumer level.
Most consumers use what’s present on their desktops, and just simply click on an icon to open a program or application. Most people don’t have a long list of applications to warrant a huge menu. Heck, even with apps ecosystems, most people have their apps immediately available on a screen full of icons.
I have been a user of PCs for the last 30 years, in both business environments and on the personal level. I’ve seen how people interact with their PCs, and most of them don’t go to the Start menu to get at what they want to use. The Start menu is useful, but then, if it’s rarely used, it wasn’t that necessary. With Windows 8, people didn’t really lose the Start menu; it’s there, but it just looks different. It’s really not that hard to use, and you ought to know that yourself as a techie. My Start menu (in the new UI), has over 100 applications which I can find easily, and click on to get started. It’s actually a lot easier to navigate than a menu which opens up other menus before you get to the application you need. Different is not necessarily more difficult; think about that.
BTW, I don’t ever like to open up a discussion by mentioning my previous experience. It’s bragging and intended to set up an experience background which says “I know better than you”. I don’t do that, but, since you mentioned your background first, I’ll mention a bit of mine. I have been in the computers and IT since 1968, so, I’m acquainted with the “ancient” and the “current”. My biggest bragging points were always to design and develop systems which were very user-friendly, to the point that, even a monkey could use them. I see the current crop of computers and tablets and smartphone, as well as the software that come with them, as being very user-friendly. All of them are pretty easy to use, for consumers and even businesses. If I had to choose any one of them as being better, I’d have to choose the Windows versions, since it’s a more modern interface, supporting a larger set of hardware configurations, and different platforms. No other system can do that, currently. I would still make changes to all of those systems to make them more user-friendly, and more appealing. An example of what I used to design for can be found in ATMs and in online banking systems, which I was involved in before those systems became popular. Coming from a design and experience standpoint, I don’t really see why people complain so much about Windows 8; in fact, it’s the more modern of UIs out there, and even iOS is going more towards what Windows 8/8.1 looks like; Android will follow.
> I have been a user of PCs for the last 30 years, in both business environments and on the personal level. I’ve seen how people interact with their PCs, and most of them don’t go to the Start menu to get at what they want to use.
You're correct that the XP/7 Start Menu was not necessarily how people started their most-used apps. Most had a shortcut on the desktop, or the XP quicklaunch bar (which Vista/7 scrambled). But I would argue that the real value of the Start Menu, when I saw most people using it, was when they needed to do ANYTHING ELSE other than their top two or three apps. If there wasn't an icon on the desktop, they knew they could find it in the Start Menu, and that was comforting.
So I guess the objection to removal/change of the Start Menu was that it took away a very useful -- and comforting -- tool that users depended on, especially when they were unsure. The worst thing you can do when someone is unsure, is remove a familiar comfortable tool they used to get them back and going again.
I think that's why everybody bitched about the Start Menu going away in Win 8. JMHO.
> I have been in the computers and IT since 1968
Ah, well, you've got me by 2 years then, as I started programming in college in 1970, and designing computer hardware a few years later, first as a hobbyist and then as part of my job starting in 1975. Nice to meet a fellow old-timer! :)
Yes, I agree, compared to what we could do back then, every system in use today is leagues ahead in terms of user friendliness, usefulness with minimum learning curve, etc. The fine points of whose UI is better for what, from release to release, are mostly noise in the grand improvement curve.
Ultimately, what matters is whether the user can do what they want/need to do, successfully, efficiently, and happily. The details of UIs change, but they're just a means to an end.
Thanks again for a pleasant and thoughtful response, and have a great evening!