Why do you have to click Start to shut down?
blogs.msdn.com
blogs.msdn.com
Windows is an exercise in 'good enough'. That's not a bad thing for a commodity OS. It doesn't mean that it should win any accolades though.
Miguel de Icaza has an amazing post on this:
http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2008/Jan-24-1.html
On the Mono download page, available versions for each platform were available as text links, with the platform's logo next to the links. Because of some configuration of the wiki engine they were using, images automatically linked to another page listing all the places where the same image is used. So, rather than clicking on the text link to download the latest version, 95 percent of Windows and Mac users would click on the logo, see the listing of other pages using the logo, scan that textual list for the highest version number (it's near the bottom of the list), visit the page for that one ancient version, and download it.
Aside: Noting that users will only read text as a last resort, and not always even then, I wonder what the success rate is for getting past Firefox 3's "this page's certificate is self-signed" warning. It can't be any better than Mono's.
That's humility.
Or to put it another way, simplicity + attractiveness sells.
David Pogue did an interesting TED talk on this in 06 in which he made a quick stab at the start menu thing at about 10 minutes in. Linked below for reference.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/david_pogue_says_simplici...
No offense, but I think there are a zillion other things that would be more important to simplify.
Hasn't Joel even argued that shutting down the computer should be unnecessary in the future anyway?
Yes, he was also complaining about there being 9 options to chose from when leaving your Windows Vista computer: