No the smartest thing to do would have been to introduce the new changes while still having a way to go back to the old in case you don't like it or it interferes with work. In older versions of Windows you could do that with your themes, going back to classic and even the start menu going back to the classic start menu and you even had the ability to edit and customize the start menu to fit what you needed.
So instead of introducing change they threw people into the deep in, people HATE change and when it is a kind of change that slows you down they hate it more.
economy has nothing to do with why MS got rid of their start menu. They want a piece of the Apple and Google store pie. So if your going to have your own app store they wanted a way to force people to use it. Thus you have metro. They didn't do the change to try and make things better they made the change to try and make more money. Windows 8 has less installs than vista so far, which is horrible. So I am not the only one who didn't take the change with open arms.
One thing MS has always done is give people a way to edit and tweak their Windows installs. They didn't do this for the home user but they did it for there network admins. Large companies who roll out thousands of systems to their network is where MS makes their money, and with office. So a change this big and they took away any option of changing it was really out of a odd play book. But since it worked with office and the ribbon and people complained about it but are now use to it they took a bet they could do it with Windows as well.
They made a touch screen interface for the desktop, there is a reason Apple didn't go that route with OSX and iOS. I even watched in interview with tim cook where he even says that lol.
So the new interface is no where near as efficient, because it was made for using your finger and not a mouse.
I would have given it more of a chance if I had the option to turn the damn thing off
Shane
