The point of the complaint is that neither users nor SysAdmins should have to add something so basic as the Start Button (and Menu) to a user interface that has been around for nearly two decades with those features.
The features were universally accepted, universally recognized, and depended-upon by nearly every Windows user in the world -- billions of them.
The features were removed because of a stupid error, likely made by a stupid committee, and driven home by a stupid focus group in an echo chamber.
Look at it this way:
Let's say you have purchased and driven automobiles for 20 years. Every time you bought a car, it came with 4 wheels mounted, tires mounted on the wheels, and the correct air pressure in each tire.
One day you go to your car dealer for a new car. He sells it to you, but when you take delivery, there are no wheels, no tires, no air pressure.
You complain, "I can't drive this car. Where are the wheels, the tires, the air pressure???"
The dealer says, "We decided that the car looks better without wheels and tires. If you want them, you can get them yourself. What, are you too dumb to go to the store a mile away and buy wheels and tires, have the tires mounted on the wheels, and have them inflated to the proper pressure? That's not rocket science. What is stopping you from getting your own wheels and tires, and inflating them?"
That is what your comment comes across as.
The point is, Windows users should not have to construct their own damn user interface. The one that has served for 20 years is perfectly fine. There was no reason to remove it. Microsoft blew it. And that's why people say Windows 8 sucks... it's not the OS, it's the user interface, terribly broken by design, for no good reason.
A business will mod and tweak a bit the Windows edition it installs for lets say 300 desktop computers sitting in one building. So one of these mods is to include a start button for Windows 8 such as classic shell or start 8. I fail to see how this is a problem. The only problem is a lack of common sense.