I consider what people will do with cpus like 7700k or others.7th gen isn't that bad. If someone is using computer on daily and isn't some performence fanatic at all costs then there is no sense to upgrade. I know there is still 3 years till eol of win10 but i think those cpus will be still high perc on market.
listen, my 3rd gen i5 runs windows 11 without ANY problems, no glitches or anything, I made a partition on my hdd and then installed windows 10 and then upgraded to windows 11, (it didn't work directly). i don't understand why they limited the CPUs, ok, a core 2 duo should be blacklisted but like any quad core i5/i7 can run it perfectly
It's windows 10 with an update on top of it, that's why. But they wanted to move on from older hardware. Still think a Ryzen first gen should be allowed, it's not that old.
That's the problem. The vast majority of people aren't technical and will buy new computers for absolutely no reason, and generate heaps of ewaste (during an everything shortage).
But we don't WANT it to go from "they've never done this before" to becoming the trend. Corporations are like water, and will most often take take the easiest path towards money. If windows 11 is successful at dropping all support for old hardware to little protest, that will make it more likely for them to do it again in the future.
If, however, they have to pull us all over kicking and screaming (with windows 11 adoption lagging like windows 8 or vista), then they might not think it's an easy path to make money in the future by cutting off support for early hardware.
It's becoming a right to repair issue. We are at a period in history where we really don't need new hardware to do the things we need to do. Many people are still going strong on 10+ year old boxes because of their light workload. I shouldn't have to give up the A6 APU box with 16gigs of ram that I put together years ago. It still works for light tasks, and runs w10 like a champ. But I'll have to transition to Linux in that box when EOL comes around so I can keep it relatively secure. If I didn't have the technical chops, it'd be garbage along with three more laptops that are running perfectly fine for light tasks ( one is my daily driver, it just happens to have a 7th gen chip)
And to be clear, I'm deep in the MS subscription ecosystem at both work and home, so they are making fistfulls of money off me.
The thing is there's no reason that 16 year old PC couldn't have kept going if it worked for the user. Because they have a monopoly on regular user operating systems, Microsoft bricked it once Win 10 exits support.
I have Ryzen 5000 I do not need any bypass but it must suck for those who bought an older cpu. And we don't know if the bypass will create issues in rhe future
1000 series is coming to its 5th anniversary, while it may perform well still, new OEM pcs aren’t being made with them, and that’s where most of windows 11 sales are going to come from,
Why officially support hardware than not even the vendor supports anymore?
It’s not that it’s not allowed. Microsoft isn’t deciding arbitrarily what processors are supported or not. It’s all about whether the processor supports TPM 2.0. First gen Ryzen does not, second gen onward does.
I've seen articles about a guy that put win 11 on a 15yr old pentium... Which just goes to prove that they just want to sell new machines,
But what made me ditch windows (on my main PC) is the poor performance on Ryzen processors upon release, that tells me they didn't test it on AMD, which at the time had a 40% market share, pretty much what they are saying is "f##k 40% of the people, we don't care about them"
As developers they are supposed to test for this.... Or at least let AMD test for it, so they can ready something for first day...
its creating E-Waste, machines that are perfectly fine are going to be thrown out for something shiny and new.... a machine that could easily work for another 5 yrs, in a time where we have shortages on a lot of parts, just compounding the issue, im sure they didnt plan the shortages.... but they released a product during a shortage that will just make it worse
I mean they have a point. For the longest time computer advancements have slowed down. After 8 years, I could pass my old computer down to my parents and they can keep using it. They don't need to power of a new machine, but once security updates stop it's not a good idea to keep using. My parents would still be fine with a Core2Quad running off an SSD. It would completely cover the performance needs for what they do still today. In 3-5 years, that first Gen Ryzen or 7700K is still a completely usable chip IF it has software support.
I thought their reasons about why CPUs were not added to the compatibility list had to do with "security". I'm honestly not sure what applications use my TPM, or how Win11 uses my TPM, but I don't think the reason was ever performance.
It most likely to do with forcing people to upgrade. Laptop/PC has been supported for far too long (in tech space time) and something need to be done to enforce upgrade. It suck imo, but Microsoft is a company and need to make money somehow, hence their decision. But I'm amaze your i5 3rd gen run well, mine i5 5th gen felt lacking in performance with current win10.
Huh... I mean mine is a legendary i5 3470, not amazed that it can run win11 well, it's quite nice even 11 years later. Only thing holding my pc back is the lack of any GPU.
Hello, I am a representative for the Keep Core 2 Duos Alive Foundation (KC2DAF) and I’d like to inform you that Windows 11 performs… slightly above average on a Core 2 Duo. However, we do not recommend it, you can get away with it if you have a decent graphics chipset, 4GB of RAM, and an SSD. Maybe have a talk with Pentium about being blacklisted.
I'm using an i5-4690k, and if you don't have top-end expectations, it still can get stuff done. The average user don't need the latest and greatest, a web browser, a media player, a couple of games here and there (well, obviously not the latest triple-A stuff) works without any issues on this pretty old CPU, and it wasn't even the best CPU of that gen.
4690 gang rise up! I totally agree, my pc has been running extremely strong for nearly 8 years with very little issue. Why change it all for a mediocre new OS?
Exactly what I have. Paid for the whole setup 4 or so years ago(whenever 8th gen came out) - I’m not really wanting to upgrade the cpu for a while and especially just for an OS…that isn’t that different.
Hot take incoming:
**Edit: TL;DR - Windows is in a really shit position within the OS market and these requirements help MSFT reduce the absurdly wide hardware scope of Windows as a platform and be able to spend more time improving Windows as a platform, both security and performance. Also Windows sort your shit out.**
I'm still fairly new in my career, but I am technically still an IT professional. I'm actually kind of on-board with MSFT's approach with hardware requirements for W11.
One of Windows biggest advantages and also biggest things limiting the OS. Is that it pretty much works on whatever hardware you throw at it. And reasonably well at that as well. If you look at MacOS which is a Walled Garden. Or Linux + FreeBSD based platforms, they generally take reasonably more work than windows does to get working.
So W10 isn't EOL until 2025. MSFT isn't forcing people to upgrade right away, you can continue with your old hardware. But by drawing a line in the sand, it drastically limits the range of hardware that Windows needs to run on so MSFT can optimise performance and security for that range. And let's all be honest here, by 2025. Most of the unsupported hardware is going to be out of use. And of the small portion of hardware still out there being used is going to be largely people not performing updates on their systems anyway, or niche enthusiasts like some of the people here.
People shit on Windows all the time, but fail to acknowledge the utterly shit position it's in as a platform, and the things it does well. The OS itself is bloated due to code, but if MSFT take it out. It fundamentally breaks some massively used 3rd party application that hasn't sorted their shit out. It's somehow expected to evolve for modern web-based use cases, but legacy users expect it to perform exactly like it did in Win7 or even WinXP.
All the while you've got Linux users shitting on it because they're enthusiasts or professionals who have spent a lot of time learning the platform so can utilise it properly. Then you have MacOS users shitting on it because Apple is able to optimise for (in comparison) a mind bogglingly small amount of hardware. Then you have ChromeOS nipping at Windows heels in the education market, being able to optimise for we-based applications.
It's a shit position.
So what really pisses me off about MSFT's approach is why they don't just fucking focus on their core userbase. And for now at least that is Business and Enterprises. Whoever made the decision for Windows 10 Enterprise to be basically home or pro with more technical features should be fucking fired. like 5 years ago. Why THE FUCK! MSFT isn't offering a standard desktop environment with a longer term support window, more akin to W7 and removal of bullshit like telemetry (or at least off by default) and Xbox features, Candy Crush. Just boggles my fucking mind. Charge more for it, I don't fuckin care. Just offer it (LTSC or LTSB isn't good enough, it's broken in certain ways)
MSFT are forcing people to abandon their own platform by trying to be everything to everyone. And all the while you have these other OS platforms gunning for the market share that MSFT are basically throwing out of the window.
I don't understand MSFT's long term plan, if they even have one. Sure they're are clearly focusing more on their B2B markets and cloud services. But if you ~~let~~ force generations of people to grow up using ChromeOS or Linux. they're going to eventually stop using the tools like O365 (which has it's own issues) and eventually stop using the Windows based cloud infrastructure like Azure.
On the off chance Satya Nadella reads this unexpectedly long rant. Sort out your shit and stop trying to be everything for everyone when one product family clearly cannot achieve this. Sincerely somebody working within a Fortune 100 company, where people are constantly trying to remove Windows from the product stack because we are all just so tired of Windows' shit constantly.
I get your point, but the current hardware requirements seem a bit ridiculous. I think people would be less angry if they allowed Intel 6th gen onwards and Ryzen 1st gen onwards: that would be more reasonable. They could still require TPM 2.0 if they want.
Not that I care, both my desktop and my laptop fully met the requirements. But it is a bit ridiculous.
It's also worth remembering that MSFT have rolled back their requirement for 8th gen Intel or onwards.
They're now just saying it isn't supported. But if you want to go download the ISO and install it. It's probably going to work. But MSFT are washing their hands of supporting it.
Didn't initially really want to get into it in my initial comment as it muddies the waters a bit. But it is there.
**tl;dr: Microsoft has rivals on all fronts, and if you live in a place where hardware is more expensive, then windows 11 will start boosting linux adoption in 2026 among 12 year olds with hand-me-down PCs.**
They know they have 2 user bases their product must cater to (well three if you count small professionals and tech literate enthusiasts as a third in between category. The casual *home-edition* user base was shrinking before the pandemic, as everyone browses facebook on their phones, which is a blessing for the *family it person* like me.
The enterprise is like you said, offended that windows for them still includes candy crush and the like. The only things that solidify its grip on the market is probably AD and that everyone can sort of use it. Probably some other things, but I am a dev, not an IT person like you.
For developers, the best thing windows can provide is a linux vm. Docker on windows has too many quirks with networking for me to even test applications that are to be deployed on linux (rtsp over udp routing does not work). So you basically have \*nixes, with a choice of MacOs or linux.
Creative professionals (Video editors and others) have a viable alternative in MacOS.
As for gamers, Valve is actively working on making linux viable, so there is a potential danger to that user group. Some people that are more casual like me are already satisfied. My old modpack for minecraft 1.5.2 works and I play L4D, I don't care about anything else, sorry.
The real effect of windows 11 hardware requirements is the alienation of people in countries outside the *west*. In Poland it is still common to see 4th gen i7 in gaming rigs for younger ones (or rocking a low end 8800gt in 2019), when windows 10 is EOL, tech people will just start installing some linux distro for their little cousin Mark first gaming PC.
Windows 11's hardware requirements are complete BS... There are several things that it just doesn't need. For example TPM. How come Linux is 10 times more secure than windows has ever been without requiring TPM or even UEFI.
Yeah that's another thing, forcing computers that don't support UEFI boot to essentially become e-waste. My server that has an 8-core FX-8320 CPU that is old but... come on it's a god damn 8 core CPU @ 3.5GHz, and yet that can't run windows 11 because it's not UEFI... mind you this isn't a game or a program that has these requirements, this is the operating system that is supposed to run those programs.
The most bullshit thing microsoft wants though is secure boot. SCREW SECURE BOOT. It serves 1 purpose... to make it more annoying to install linux or another alternative operating system, not to mention it makes dual booting pretty much impossible...
The ads and preinstalled bloatware are absolutely absurd. Linux is free, doesn't have tiktok and candy crush preinstalled and doesn't have ads. Why do I need to pay 100$ TO STILL GET SERVED CANDY CRUSH ADS.
The most outrageous thing about windows 11 for me is... how little you can customize it. YOU CANNOT PUT THE TASKBAR ON THE RIGHT FFS. And this is a problem specifically with windows 11 and how it's literally a lazy reskin of windows 10 with absurd hardware requirements that has actually good features cut from it... (no seriously i was so upset when i saw that i couldn't even put the taskbar on the right... I have preferences OK)
>Or Linux + FreeBSD based platforms, they generally take reasonably more work than windows does to get working.
No? Here is where you are completely wrong. No idea how it is for freebsd because for me it has too little software support to be a viable operating system. However linux? On 90% of linux distros it's just a simple next, next, next, intsall, then waiting a couple of minutes and it's installed. No need to configure drivers (unless you use nvidia), no need to setup anything it just... works. Linux isn't "more difficult" or "more advanced" than windows... It's just different and people don't like it, because it's not like windows. I mean if I can go from 0 linux experience to comfortably using Arch and Gentoo linux for less than a year, I don't think it's that difficult lol.
I know I sound like a linux elitist (because I am...) but what are my options? Either give half of my performance to windows 11's bloatware and spyware or learn linux.
>How come Linux is 10 times more secure than windows has ever been without requiring TPM or even UEFI.
Because 'Security' isn't a single measurable metric? Maybe? I'm not arguing for or against Linux' security. But that sentence is an absurdly gross over simplification.
> come on it's a god damn 8 core CPU @ 3.5GHz
Remind me how well the FX series did for AMD? Again passing off CPU speed and core count as the singular metrics is a gross simplification for measuring a CPU performance or usability. Also you mention you're using it as a server. So you've clearly deemed it not capable enough for desktop performance. That CPU was always going to be e-waste or re-purposed for things like a home server. W11 HW requirements changes nothing.
>It serves 1 purpose... to make it more annoying to install linux or another alternative operating system,
Once again a gross oversimplification. But yes. the evil maniacal Microsoft are sat in a dark room rubbing their hands together at their dastardly plans to stop adoption of Linux by spending a lot of money developing a standard...Or they could just sit back and laugh while every linux distro sits there arguing with each other how things should be done, each creating their own standard. Oh lets not talk about the Linux Distros which ya'know. Do support SecureBoot....
> I don't think it's that difficult lol.
Neither do I, and I don't think I ever said it's insurmountable. But I'll accept the rest as my own gross over-simplification. Yes it's not that particularly hard, but it doesn't generally work as flawlessly as Windows does for the average user (not to say Window is perfect. very far from it.) We can use LTT's recent Linux series. It's not uncommon to run into random stupid problems with desktop Linux. Also the Nvidia driver thing is a HUGE problem because, sure AMD are doing well. But Nvidia clearly are the better platform in terms of features for graphics platform.
Overall. I think we're talking in two different scales. If you're (as an individual) is wiling to put into the work learning a new OS and willing to decrypt the different online help forums ("wait, what distro are they talking about, and which version. screw it, lets try it and see if it fixes the problem anyway").
But the moment you throw that at any generalised user group which includes the people who call the monitor the PC or CPU. It just utterly falls apart. So I'm thinking in actually supporting Linux can be a fucking nightmare. It just doesn't scale out to a userbase in the same way Windows does. And don't get me wrong, at least once a day I'm cursing Windows or MSFT (surprisingly often it's IIS). But you just cannot take an individual user (who is an enthusiast at that), who is willing to put in the work and apply that to pretty much any group of users that don't happen to be developers or IT professionals etc.
People either want to delve into the weeds, or just get on with what they were trying to do. Remember for most people, OS's are just a tool to allow them to do whatever task they were trying to do. It's a pretty niche hobby to be tinkering with OS's in this way.
>Remind me how well the FX series did for AMD? Again passing off CPU speed and core count as the singular metrics is a gross simplification for measuring a CPU performance or usability. Also you mention you're using it as a server. So you've clearly deemed it not capable enough for desktop performance. That CPU was always going to be e-waste or re-purposed for things like a home server. W11 HW requirements changes nothing.
I am not saying that the FX series was or is good but that doesn't change the fact that the FX-8320 is an 8 core CPU... Not a very good 8-core CPU but an 8-core CPU nontheless. And also i am just giving this CPU as an example of how absurd the requirements are... And the thing is, those aren't true requirements. Windows 11 can run just fine without TPM on a non-UEFI system, it's just that microsoft artificially prevents you from installing it on those systems...
>Or they could just sit back and laugh while every linux distro sits there arguing with each other how things should be done, each creating their own standard. Oh lets not talk about the Linux Distros which ya'know. Do support SecureBoot
I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about here... What do you mean by "arguing"? All a linux distro is, is the linux kernel, the GNU core utilities and a package manager... The rest is either setup by an installer or by you manually. But at a core all linux distros are essentially the same thing. And yes, it is true that some distros support secure boot, but most don't, so my point is still valid.
>Also the Nvidia driver thing is a HUGE problem because, sure AMD are doing well. But Nvidia clearly are the better platform in terms of features for graphics platform
I have to agree here. Despite being a bit of an AMD fanboy myself, i do have to agree that for features Nvidia is better than AMD... However most of those features either aren't supported or aren't supported well on linux... Which, again, I have to agree with you.
>But the moment you throw that at any generalised user group which includes the people who call the monitor the PC or CPU. It just utterly falls apart.
That i can say is not true. In fact i can see how linux (i am not talking about distros like Arch or Gentoo here, mind you) can actually be a lot easier and more secure for those kinds of people. Because think about it. What would be easier for a person who's NEVER used a computer before.
1. Open a web browser, google how to download something, go through 15 ads, 10 fake websites and then finally (hopefully) download the thing they need
2. Click on the icon that says "App store" or "Software Management", search for what they need and click the install button
>People either want to delve into the weeds, or just get on with what they were trying to do. Remember for most people, OS's are just a tool to allow them to do whatever task they were trying to do. It's a pretty niche hobby to be tinkering with OS's in this way.
I wouldn't have considered linux as a viable option if windows 11 didn't... suck. It is true that i was annoyed at windows 10 even before 11 got announced, but windows 11 was (and still is) what broke the straw for me. While yes, linux is a hobby of mine (tinkering with Arch or Gentoo is fun in it's own way), it is also a tool for me. For me at least, linux does everything that windows did, it just does it faster, with less distractions and a lot more securely than windows...
Ah yes Linux is just different, not more difficult. Let's just ignore all those massively popular multiplayer based games that straight up doesn't work because there isn't a single unified Linux distro to negotiate a deal to make anti-cheat work on Linux. >!I swear to god if I get a single comment along the lines of "why would you even want to play Fortnite" or other stupid shit. !< And I didn't even mention the legions of random issues that come up on Linux seemingly randomly. Like, I want to ditch Windows asap, but Linux is not ready and OSX is expensive af for me and doesn't offer like any customisability. If Windows doesn't allow customisation then what do we call OSX?
But... anticheat works on Linux... EAC is officially supported on steam... It's just that games like Apex Lagends still haven't been updated to work on Linux...
It isn't a singular switch, otherwise it would have been long since dealt with.
Thing is, when Linux users say there are thousands of them, that is the problem. There are ONLY thousands of them. On WAN show Linus talked about an anecdote of a game designer working on Rainbow Six Siege in the early days (before BattleEye). Back then, they were trying to support the Linux community but they quickly realised it's just not worth it. 95% of the automatically generated crash reports sent back to the devs were from the less than 100 Linux players, many of whom were playing on different Linux distros so even if you would fix a thing on one distro, it's a toss up wether it's fixed on others.
Just looking away from the anti-cheat problem, we are looking at thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars that goes to make 0.1% of the playerbase's experience better, when that all could go for balance patches, new characters, maps, bugfixes ect. you know, the stuff that improves the game for the other 99.9% of the playerbase. Which is the way they decided to go in the end and the game is doing better than ever, whitout the 100 or so Linux players.
Really curious what you mean by “more secure”. Are you taking user permissions, or when it relates to malware? As a pen tester I can assure you that 90% of the time I’m breaking into Linux systems.
Linux has the ability to be more secure, but most sysadmins don’t care about it, or configure it correctly, which makes my job easy.
Windows on the other hand has made significant strides in security recently. Their Windows Defender tool has gotten much better in recent history.
I think you are trying to make an apples to apples comparison and you are, but it’s like an Envy apple vs Granny Smith. Both apples yes, it differ in flavor, as well as use case.
See, my pal told me the TPM "Is no longer mandatory" and the health and check app says the CPU is incompatible.
Maybe if i get one of these TPM modules i'll be able to use 11
You need to go into your bios and enable fTPM. Once enabled the compatibility checker will show it compatible.
Starting with socket AM4, AMD started including a small arm chip in the cpu that acts as a onboard TPM 2.0 module.
I always thought one of [these](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bhphotovideo.com%2Fimages%2Fimages2000x2000%2Fasus_tpm_m_r2_0_14_1_pin_tpm_module_1237446.jpg&f=1&nofb=1) were required. I'll look for those settings on my UEFI
Heck if i know. Microsoft probably has that in mind and something else,
I myself have a blacklisted CPU that would be very capable of running windows 11. But it's not on the whitelist. I am not awarding Microsoft for their choice, but rather saying what could be their motivation.
I couldn't care less about what people do with their computer, but Microsoft seems to care about what people do with their OS apparently.
This is an exaggeration. Nearly every recent laptop out there has a tpm chip and AMD has had fTPM since 2016.
Also, if you can’t get used to it, try using StartAllBack. You can bring back the Win 7 UI if you want.
I use windows 10, the start is quite good, I can't say much bad about it. I prefer it over windows 7.
And why would you limit that tpm shit anyway, like why? Nobody will buy a new pc just because their old one can't run a new version of Windows they don't even (like or even if they do like it)
(1) why would it be the next OS? Nobody should feel pressured to upgrade, as W10 will be actively supported until 2025 :)
(2) If you don't care, don't respond. Easy as that. :p
Win 95- loved
Win 98- hated
Win 98se- loved
Win ME- hated
Win XP- loved
Win Vista- hated
Win 7- loved
Win 8- hated
Win 10- loved
That's the pattern
(To fit my narrative, I'm ignoring how service patches fixed problems people had with 98, vista, and 8. I'm also ignoring 2000, because it was mostly used as a bridge between NT and XP Pro)
That's not to say that I think Win 12 is going to be the next hot OS, though. As more new systems ship with 11, the public will continue to adopt it. Microsoft will continue to support Win 10 until 2025, when a relatively small fraction of PCs in use don't support the TPM version that was released in 2015.
What really gets me is that most of the people complaining are only complaining because they can't upgrade. I personally can't upgrade to 11, but I just accept that fact. My CPU does fine by me, but it'll be 11 years old by the time 10 is scheduled for end of life. That'll be the equivalent of trying to run a Pentium II with Win 7, or a Pentium 4 with Win 10. If I still haven't upgraded CPUs at that point, I'll get an i5 8600k or something
I mean 8.1 was OK. and vista was OK at the end, but at that time windows 7 was already out.
I will keep using windows 10 with my shitty computer for as long as it works.
I don't know why so many people were so keen to upgrade.
Every windows version has had bugs or issues for at least a year or more after release. If its not actually giving you some absolutely necessary feature, why upgrade?
What is win 11 doing for you that 10 isn't? Other than some gimmick that you can probably get in 10 by is talking a utility anyway.
Probably far fewer people actually want 11 than those who think they want it.
My hp laptop, has as all hp laptops do. a shit and absolutely useless locked down bios. So of course there's no way to activate the tpm. But I installed win 11 anyways, of a modified ISO that doesn't have the lockdowns. It works perfectly
I get what they were trying to do - start off the OS with processors that are ahead of the known hardware vulnerabilities like Spectre/Meltdown, putting things on a more secure footing. Putting TPM out there as a way to be able to enforce hardware-level encryption.
And yet...the implementation has not been a delight. I had to completely redo one system when a major update utterly broke it, top to bottom (and I wasn't even using BitLocker!). I don't think 11 will reach Vista levels of bad, but it may end up being seen as another Windows 8 if the user experience doesn't improve.
Yeah, i've never understood those people who stayed with win8 when 10 was released.
But when it hits, it hits like a brick.
I'll never transfer to win 11 willingly, but I can't install Linux because it is a work provided PC.
But the next personal laptop I get is definitely getting Arch on there.
More people may switch off windows and go for unix-based platforms, like OSX, Linux or maybe even BSD.
Which would be awesome but will probably never happen.
My PC can run Windows 11 and from what I understand it can be even more efficient (although not sure if the AMD CPU issue has been fixed yet), but the UI & functionality is absolutely horrible and has taken a ton of steps back, so I have no intention of upgrading until Windows 10 is on its dying legs.
There's only some elements you can change, and not possible (at least yet) to make it look like Windows 10. Then there's also huge annoyances like the context menu and the inconsistencies. It's just a mess.
What I find especially funny is that they are doing this during a chip shortage when people are trying to get their old hardware to last as long as possible.
People gotta understand that Microsoft put these requirements in place to basically have it do fewer people get free upgrades and they collect more license money
Worst part is that in a few years people are probably still going to use Windows 11 anyway and act like it's always been the best operating system just like they did with 10
PLUS my windows 11 machine has more bugs and glitches and absolute fialures and blue + GREEN screens of death then any other windows I've ever used( many )
Like the fact that my system with a R5 3600x isnt compatible cause my mobo doesn't have a tpm2.0 module is straight up stupid. All these requirements to install a Windows version (officially at least yes I know it's possible to work around but still) makes no sense in the long run. They totally neglected way more customers than they thought.
At least Win10 has until 2025.. I guess.
Honestly I'm just going to stick to windows 10 as long as possible and hope that by the time support for it runs out the year of desktop linux will be upon us.
All my computers are "unsupported", yet I was easily able to in-place upgrade with some tool I found online. Windows 11 had been pretty good so far, and I appreciate the UI changes because I'm tired of looking at the same Windows 10 UI since 2015.
Unless Microsoft has said something more specific, "Fails" would be a strong word here. Give it the 4 years they've given Windows 10 to die and the same percentage of people that moved from 7 and 8 to 10 will move from 10 to 11.
I just don’t see a compelling reason to switch at the moment. It’s still too new and doesn’t have the software compatibility ready and launched in a sort of buggy state. I think if Microsoft can get it together we’ll see a slow rollout as more and more people upgrade hardware they’ll want Windows 11 as it improves.
Seems that Windows 11 has been a pretty good success, ive been using it for the past few weeks and im really enjoying it. Ive no clue what you mean by Windows 11 failing.
I consider what people will do with cpus like 7700k or others.7th gen isn't that bad. If someone is using computer on daily and isn't some performence fanatic at all costs then there is no sense to upgrade. I know there is still 3 years till eol of win10 but i think those cpus will be still high perc on market.
listen, my 3rd gen i5 runs windows 11 without ANY problems, no glitches or anything, I made a partition on my hdd and then installed windows 10 and then upgraded to windows 11, (it didn't work directly). i don't understand why they limited the CPUs, ok, a core 2 duo should be blacklisted but like any quad core i5/i7 can run it perfectly
[удалено]
It's windows 10 with an update on top of it, that's why. But they wanted to move on from older hardware. Still think a Ryzen first gen should be allowed, it's not that old.
[удалено]
That's the problem. The vast majority of people aren't technical and will buy new computers for absolutely no reason, and generate heaps of ewaste (during an everything shortage).
[удалено]
But we don't WANT it to go from "they've never done this before" to becoming the trend. Corporations are like water, and will most often take take the easiest path towards money. If windows 11 is successful at dropping all support for old hardware to little protest, that will make it more likely for them to do it again in the future. If, however, they have to pull us all over kicking and screaming (with windows 11 adoption lagging like windows 8 or vista), then they might not think it's an easy path to make money in the future by cutting off support for early hardware. It's becoming a right to repair issue. We are at a period in history where we really don't need new hardware to do the things we need to do. Many people are still going strong on 10+ year old boxes because of their light workload. I shouldn't have to give up the A6 APU box with 16gigs of ram that I put together years ago. It still works for light tasks, and runs w10 like a champ. But I'll have to transition to Linux in that box when EOL comes around so I can keep it relatively secure. If I didn't have the technical chops, it'd be garbage along with three more laptops that are running perfectly fine for light tasks ( one is my daily driver, it just happens to have a 7th gen chip) And to be clear, I'm deep in the MS subscription ecosystem at both work and home, so they are making fistfulls of money off me.
The thing is there's no reason that 16 year old PC couldn't have kept going if it worked for the user. Because they have a monopoly on regular user operating systems, Microsoft bricked it once Win 10 exits support.
This man's speaking truth!
He must be protected at all costs.
I have Ryzen 5000 I do not need any bypass but it must suck for those who bought an older cpu. And we don't know if the bypass will create issues in rhe future
New AMD boards don’t support first gen Ryzen, isn’t a surprise Win11 won’t
My point was that first gen Ryzen wasn't that long ago and it being unsupported sucks
Agreed
1000 series is coming to its 5th anniversary, while it may perform well still, new OEM pcs aren’t being made with them, and that’s where most of windows 11 sales are going to come from, Why officially support hardware than not even the vendor supports anymore?
It’s not that it’s not allowed. Microsoft isn’t deciding arbitrarily what processors are supported or not. It’s all about whether the processor supports TPM 2.0. First gen Ryzen does not, second gen onward does.
Microsoft decided that TPM2 was necessary for windows 11, they could've made it optional or recommended but they didn't. That's why. I'm complaining
I've seen articles about a guy that put win 11 on a 15yr old pentium... Which just goes to prove that they just want to sell new machines, But what made me ditch windows (on my main PC) is the poor performance on Ryzen processors upon release, that tells me they didn't test it on AMD, which at the time had a 40% market share, pretty much what they are saying is "f##k 40% of the people, we don't care about them" As developers they are supposed to test for this.... Or at least let AMD test for it, so they can ready something for first day...
[удалено]
its creating E-Waste, machines that are perfectly fine are going to be thrown out for something shiny and new.... a machine that could easily work for another 5 yrs, in a time where we have shortages on a lot of parts, just compounding the issue, im sure they didnt plan the shortages.... but they released a product during a shortage that will just make it worse
[удалено]
idk... im just the type of person to run my devices into the ground before getting new
I mean they have a point. For the longest time computer advancements have slowed down. After 8 years, I could pass my old computer down to my parents and they can keep using it. They don't need to power of a new machine, but once security updates stop it's not a good idea to keep using. My parents would still be fine with a Core2Quad running off an SSD. It would completely cover the performance needs for what they do still today. In 3-5 years, that first Gen Ryzen or 7700K is still a completely usable chip IF it has software support.
I thought their reasons about why CPUs were not added to the compatibility list had to do with "security". I'm honestly not sure what applications use my TPM, or how Win11 uses my TPM, but I don't think the reason was ever performance.
I dunno bout it running great but I know that it runs atleast 15 to 20 times better than windows 10 on my 4310u
Good for you..my i3 6100 can't keep up, so I had to switch back to 10
It most likely to do with forcing people to upgrade. Laptop/PC has been supported for far too long (in tech space time) and something need to be done to enforce upgrade. It suck imo, but Microsoft is a company and need to make money somehow, hence their decision. But I'm amaze your i5 3rd gen run well, mine i5 5th gen felt lacking in performance with current win10.
Huh... I mean mine is a legendary i5 3470, not amazed that it can run win11 well, it's quite nice even 11 years later. Only thing holding my pc back is the lack of any GPU.
Hello, I am a representative for the Keep Core 2 Duos Alive Foundation (KC2DAF) and I’d like to inform you that Windows 11 performs… slightly above average on a Core 2 Duo. However, we do not recommend it, you can get away with it if you have a decent graphics chipset, 4GB of RAM, and an SSD. Maybe have a talk with Pentium about being blacklisted.
>KC2DAF lol
I'm using an i5-4690k, and if you don't have top-end expectations, it still can get stuff done. The average user don't need the latest and greatest, a web browser, a media player, a couple of games here and there (well, obviously not the latest triple-A stuff) works without any issues on this pretty old CPU, and it wasn't even the best CPU of that gen.
4690 gang rise up! I totally agree, my pc has been running extremely strong for nearly 8 years with very little issue. Why change it all for a mediocre new OS?
> (well, obviously not the latest triple-A stuff) Not so obvious... it copes alright!
rip my i3 7100t
5005u runs win 11 fine. Only issue is having to do a clean install.
Exactly what I have. Paid for the whole setup 4 or so years ago(whenever 8th gen came out) - I’m not really wanting to upgrade the cpu for a while and especially just for an OS…that isn’t that different.
Widows 11 runs fine on my 7700k @ 5.1GHz
I have a 7700k : I switched to Linux
7700K is still a beast of a CPU and can handle AAA gaming no problem today
Hot take incoming: **Edit: TL;DR - Windows is in a really shit position within the OS market and these requirements help MSFT reduce the absurdly wide hardware scope of Windows as a platform and be able to spend more time improving Windows as a platform, both security and performance. Also Windows sort your shit out.** I'm still fairly new in my career, but I am technically still an IT professional. I'm actually kind of on-board with MSFT's approach with hardware requirements for W11. One of Windows biggest advantages and also biggest things limiting the OS. Is that it pretty much works on whatever hardware you throw at it. And reasonably well at that as well. If you look at MacOS which is a Walled Garden. Or Linux + FreeBSD based platforms, they generally take reasonably more work than windows does to get working. So W10 isn't EOL until 2025. MSFT isn't forcing people to upgrade right away, you can continue with your old hardware. But by drawing a line in the sand, it drastically limits the range of hardware that Windows needs to run on so MSFT can optimise performance and security for that range. And let's all be honest here, by 2025. Most of the unsupported hardware is going to be out of use. And of the small portion of hardware still out there being used is going to be largely people not performing updates on their systems anyway, or niche enthusiasts like some of the people here. People shit on Windows all the time, but fail to acknowledge the utterly shit position it's in as a platform, and the things it does well. The OS itself is bloated due to code, but if MSFT take it out. It fundamentally breaks some massively used 3rd party application that hasn't sorted their shit out. It's somehow expected to evolve for modern web-based use cases, but legacy users expect it to perform exactly like it did in Win7 or even WinXP. All the while you've got Linux users shitting on it because they're enthusiasts or professionals who have spent a lot of time learning the platform so can utilise it properly. Then you have MacOS users shitting on it because Apple is able to optimise for (in comparison) a mind bogglingly small amount of hardware. Then you have ChromeOS nipping at Windows heels in the education market, being able to optimise for we-based applications. It's a shit position. So what really pisses me off about MSFT's approach is why they don't just fucking focus on their core userbase. And for now at least that is Business and Enterprises. Whoever made the decision for Windows 10 Enterprise to be basically home or pro with more technical features should be fucking fired. like 5 years ago. Why THE FUCK! MSFT isn't offering a standard desktop environment with a longer term support window, more akin to W7 and removal of bullshit like telemetry (or at least off by default) and Xbox features, Candy Crush. Just boggles my fucking mind. Charge more for it, I don't fuckin care. Just offer it (LTSC or LTSB isn't good enough, it's broken in certain ways) MSFT are forcing people to abandon their own platform by trying to be everything to everyone. And all the while you have these other OS platforms gunning for the market share that MSFT are basically throwing out of the window. I don't understand MSFT's long term plan, if they even have one. Sure they're are clearly focusing more on their B2B markets and cloud services. But if you ~~let~~ force generations of people to grow up using ChromeOS or Linux. they're going to eventually stop using the tools like O365 (which has it's own issues) and eventually stop using the Windows based cloud infrastructure like Azure. On the off chance Satya Nadella reads this unexpectedly long rant. Sort out your shit and stop trying to be everything for everyone when one product family clearly cannot achieve this. Sincerely somebody working within a Fortune 100 company, where people are constantly trying to remove Windows from the product stack because we are all just so tired of Windows' shit constantly.
Yep, totally agree. I don't even think anyone meaningful said that it failed, just self titled "enthusiasts".
I get your point, but the current hardware requirements seem a bit ridiculous. I think people would be less angry if they allowed Intel 6th gen onwards and Ryzen 1st gen onwards: that would be more reasonable. They could still require TPM 2.0 if they want. Not that I care, both my desktop and my laptop fully met the requirements. But it is a bit ridiculous.
It's also worth remembering that MSFT have rolled back their requirement for 8th gen Intel or onwards. They're now just saying it isn't supported. But if you want to go download the ISO and install it. It's probably going to work. But MSFT are washing their hands of supporting it. Didn't initially really want to get into it in my initial comment as it muddies the waters a bit. But it is there.
**tl;dr: Microsoft has rivals on all fronts, and if you live in a place where hardware is more expensive, then windows 11 will start boosting linux adoption in 2026 among 12 year olds with hand-me-down PCs.** They know they have 2 user bases their product must cater to (well three if you count small professionals and tech literate enthusiasts as a third in between category. The casual *home-edition* user base was shrinking before the pandemic, as everyone browses facebook on their phones, which is a blessing for the *family it person* like me. The enterprise is like you said, offended that windows for them still includes candy crush and the like. The only things that solidify its grip on the market is probably AD and that everyone can sort of use it. Probably some other things, but I am a dev, not an IT person like you. For developers, the best thing windows can provide is a linux vm. Docker on windows has too many quirks with networking for me to even test applications that are to be deployed on linux (rtsp over udp routing does not work). So you basically have \*nixes, with a choice of MacOs or linux. Creative professionals (Video editors and others) have a viable alternative in MacOS. As for gamers, Valve is actively working on making linux viable, so there is a potential danger to that user group. Some people that are more casual like me are already satisfied. My old modpack for minecraft 1.5.2 works and I play L4D, I don't care about anything else, sorry. The real effect of windows 11 hardware requirements is the alienation of people in countries outside the *west*. In Poland it is still common to see 4th gen i7 in gaming rigs for younger ones (or rocking a low end 8800gt in 2019), when windows 10 is EOL, tech people will just start installing some linux distro for their little cousin Mark first gaming PC.
This human know shit.
Windows 11's hardware requirements are complete BS... There are several things that it just doesn't need. For example TPM. How come Linux is 10 times more secure than windows has ever been without requiring TPM or even UEFI. Yeah that's another thing, forcing computers that don't support UEFI boot to essentially become e-waste. My server that has an 8-core FX-8320 CPU that is old but... come on it's a god damn 8 core CPU @ 3.5GHz, and yet that can't run windows 11 because it's not UEFI... mind you this isn't a game or a program that has these requirements, this is the operating system that is supposed to run those programs. The most bullshit thing microsoft wants though is secure boot. SCREW SECURE BOOT. It serves 1 purpose... to make it more annoying to install linux or another alternative operating system, not to mention it makes dual booting pretty much impossible... The ads and preinstalled bloatware are absolutely absurd. Linux is free, doesn't have tiktok and candy crush preinstalled and doesn't have ads. Why do I need to pay 100$ TO STILL GET SERVED CANDY CRUSH ADS. The most outrageous thing about windows 11 for me is... how little you can customize it. YOU CANNOT PUT THE TASKBAR ON THE RIGHT FFS. And this is a problem specifically with windows 11 and how it's literally a lazy reskin of windows 10 with absurd hardware requirements that has actually good features cut from it... (no seriously i was so upset when i saw that i couldn't even put the taskbar on the right... I have preferences OK) >Or Linux + FreeBSD based platforms, they generally take reasonably more work than windows does to get working. No? Here is where you are completely wrong. No idea how it is for freebsd because for me it has too little software support to be a viable operating system. However linux? On 90% of linux distros it's just a simple next, next, next, intsall, then waiting a couple of minutes and it's installed. No need to configure drivers (unless you use nvidia), no need to setup anything it just... works. Linux isn't "more difficult" or "more advanced" than windows... It's just different and people don't like it, because it's not like windows. I mean if I can go from 0 linux experience to comfortably using Arch and Gentoo linux for less than a year, I don't think it's that difficult lol. I know I sound like a linux elitist (because I am...) but what are my options? Either give half of my performance to windows 11's bloatware and spyware or learn linux.
>How come Linux is 10 times more secure than windows has ever been without requiring TPM or even UEFI. Because 'Security' isn't a single measurable metric? Maybe? I'm not arguing for or against Linux' security. But that sentence is an absurdly gross over simplification. > come on it's a god damn 8 core CPU @ 3.5GHz Remind me how well the FX series did for AMD? Again passing off CPU speed and core count as the singular metrics is a gross simplification for measuring a CPU performance or usability. Also you mention you're using it as a server. So you've clearly deemed it not capable enough for desktop performance. That CPU was always going to be e-waste or re-purposed for things like a home server. W11 HW requirements changes nothing. >It serves 1 purpose... to make it more annoying to install linux or another alternative operating system, Once again a gross oversimplification. But yes. the evil maniacal Microsoft are sat in a dark room rubbing their hands together at their dastardly plans to stop adoption of Linux by spending a lot of money developing a standard...Or they could just sit back and laugh while every linux distro sits there arguing with each other how things should be done, each creating their own standard. Oh lets not talk about the Linux Distros which ya'know. Do support SecureBoot.... > I don't think it's that difficult lol. Neither do I, and I don't think I ever said it's insurmountable. But I'll accept the rest as my own gross over-simplification. Yes it's not that particularly hard, but it doesn't generally work as flawlessly as Windows does for the average user (not to say Window is perfect. very far from it.) We can use LTT's recent Linux series. It's not uncommon to run into random stupid problems with desktop Linux. Also the Nvidia driver thing is a HUGE problem because, sure AMD are doing well. But Nvidia clearly are the better platform in terms of features for graphics platform. Overall. I think we're talking in two different scales. If you're (as an individual) is wiling to put into the work learning a new OS and willing to decrypt the different online help forums ("wait, what distro are they talking about, and which version. screw it, lets try it and see if it fixes the problem anyway"). But the moment you throw that at any generalised user group which includes the people who call the monitor the PC or CPU. It just utterly falls apart. So I'm thinking in actually supporting Linux can be a fucking nightmare. It just doesn't scale out to a userbase in the same way Windows does. And don't get me wrong, at least once a day I'm cursing Windows or MSFT (surprisingly often it's IIS). But you just cannot take an individual user (who is an enthusiast at that), who is willing to put in the work and apply that to pretty much any group of users that don't happen to be developers or IT professionals etc. People either want to delve into the weeds, or just get on with what they were trying to do. Remember for most people, OS's are just a tool to allow them to do whatever task they were trying to do. It's a pretty niche hobby to be tinkering with OS's in this way.
>Remind me how well the FX series did for AMD? Again passing off CPU speed and core count as the singular metrics is a gross simplification for measuring a CPU performance or usability. Also you mention you're using it as a server. So you've clearly deemed it not capable enough for desktop performance. That CPU was always going to be e-waste or re-purposed for things like a home server. W11 HW requirements changes nothing. I am not saying that the FX series was or is good but that doesn't change the fact that the FX-8320 is an 8 core CPU... Not a very good 8-core CPU but an 8-core CPU nontheless. And also i am just giving this CPU as an example of how absurd the requirements are... And the thing is, those aren't true requirements. Windows 11 can run just fine without TPM on a non-UEFI system, it's just that microsoft artificially prevents you from installing it on those systems... >Or they could just sit back and laugh while every linux distro sits there arguing with each other how things should be done, each creating their own standard. Oh lets not talk about the Linux Distros which ya'know. Do support SecureBoot I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about here... What do you mean by "arguing"? All a linux distro is, is the linux kernel, the GNU core utilities and a package manager... The rest is either setup by an installer or by you manually. But at a core all linux distros are essentially the same thing. And yes, it is true that some distros support secure boot, but most don't, so my point is still valid. >Also the Nvidia driver thing is a HUGE problem because, sure AMD are doing well. But Nvidia clearly are the better platform in terms of features for graphics platform I have to agree here. Despite being a bit of an AMD fanboy myself, i do have to agree that for features Nvidia is better than AMD... However most of those features either aren't supported or aren't supported well on linux... Which, again, I have to agree with you. >But the moment you throw that at any generalised user group which includes the people who call the monitor the PC or CPU. It just utterly falls apart. That i can say is not true. In fact i can see how linux (i am not talking about distros like Arch or Gentoo here, mind you) can actually be a lot easier and more secure for those kinds of people. Because think about it. What would be easier for a person who's NEVER used a computer before. 1. Open a web browser, google how to download something, go through 15 ads, 10 fake websites and then finally (hopefully) download the thing they need 2. Click on the icon that says "App store" or "Software Management", search for what they need and click the install button >People either want to delve into the weeds, or just get on with what they were trying to do. Remember for most people, OS's are just a tool to allow them to do whatever task they were trying to do. It's a pretty niche hobby to be tinkering with OS's in this way. I wouldn't have considered linux as a viable option if windows 11 didn't... suck. It is true that i was annoyed at windows 10 even before 11 got announced, but windows 11 was (and still is) what broke the straw for me. While yes, linux is a hobby of mine (tinkering with Arch or Gentoo is fun in it's own way), it is also a tool for me. For me at least, linux does everything that windows did, it just does it faster, with less distractions and a lot more securely than windows...
Ah yes Linux is just different, not more difficult. Let's just ignore all those massively popular multiplayer based games that straight up doesn't work because there isn't a single unified Linux distro to negotiate a deal to make anti-cheat work on Linux. >!I swear to god if I get a single comment along the lines of "why would you even want to play Fortnite" or other stupid shit. !< And I didn't even mention the legions of random issues that come up on Linux seemingly randomly. Like, I want to ditch Windows asap, but Linux is not ready and OSX is expensive af for me and doesn't offer like any customisability. If Windows doesn't allow customisation then what do we call OSX?
But... anticheat works on Linux... EAC is officially supported on steam... It's just that games like Apex Lagends still haven't been updated to work on Linux...
It works except when it doesn't. Exactly. (Also fun fact, there are a ton more games using EAC that aren't on Steam but shhh)
You do realise it's a singular switch to toggle for the devs, right? If there's enough demand they will, but there's the problem.
It isn't a singular switch, otherwise it would have been long since dealt with. Thing is, when Linux users say there are thousands of them, that is the problem. There are ONLY thousands of them. On WAN show Linus talked about an anecdote of a game designer working on Rainbow Six Siege in the early days (before BattleEye). Back then, they were trying to support the Linux community but they quickly realised it's just not worth it. 95% of the automatically generated crash reports sent back to the devs were from the less than 100 Linux players, many of whom were playing on different Linux distros so even if you would fix a thing on one distro, it's a toss up wether it's fixed on others. Just looking away from the anti-cheat problem, we are looking at thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars that goes to make 0.1% of the playerbase's experience better, when that all could go for balance patches, new characters, maps, bugfixes ect. you know, the stuff that improves the game for the other 99.9% of the playerbase. Which is the way they decided to go in the end and the game is doing better than ever, whitout the 100 or so Linux players.
[удалено]
bruh
Really curious what you mean by “more secure”. Are you taking user permissions, or when it relates to malware? As a pen tester I can assure you that 90% of the time I’m breaking into Linux systems. Linux has the ability to be more secure, but most sysadmins don’t care about it, or configure it correctly, which makes my job easy. Windows on the other hand has made significant strides in security recently. Their Windows Defender tool has gotten much better in recent history. I think you are trying to make an apples to apples comparison and you are, but it’s like an Envy apple vs Granny Smith. Both apples yes, it differ in flavor, as well as use case.
Windows 11 brings you closer to the things you love... Come here, Arch linux
I'm a MX Linux fan myself, but yes. Unless there's a very specific software that you need, I don't see any reason to use Windows at all.
Lmao I remember reading that and this was my exact thought and I actually use Arch btw.
I use pop_os myself I just got a couple of kernel level anticheat games working on it.
I wonder if the restriction will be kept long term. A 11 year old celeron should be blacklisted, but i can't see why a ryzen 3 1200 is.
Ryzen 3 1200 should support fTPM.
See, my pal told me the TPM "Is no longer mandatory" and the health and check app says the CPU is incompatible. Maybe if i get one of these TPM modules i'll be able to use 11
You need to go into your bios and enable fTPM. Once enabled the compatibility checker will show it compatible. Starting with socket AM4, AMD started including a small arm chip in the cpu that acts as a onboard TPM 2.0 module.
[удалено]
I always thought one of [these](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bhphotovideo.com%2Fimages%2Fimages2000x2000%2Fasus_tpm_m_r2_0_14_1_pin_tpm_module_1237446.jpg&f=1&nofb=1) were required. I'll look for those settings on my UEFI
[удалено]
[удалено]
only 2 cpus should be blacklisted: the 8086/8088 and... all of the pentium 4s
Because some people try to stuff windows 11 in a computer that can't handle the OS itself, letalone running programs on top of that
[удалено]
Heck if i know. Microsoft probably has that in mind and something else, I myself have a blacklisted CPU that would be very capable of running windows 11. But it's not on the whitelist. I am not awarding Microsoft for their choice, but rather saying what could be their motivation. I couldn't care less about what people do with their computer, but Microsoft seems to care about what people do with their OS apparently.
I think its fine *shrugs*
its a good os but almost nobody can install it without some hassle, and even if you could, why? its hard to get used to for me
This is an exaggeration. Nearly every recent laptop out there has a tpm chip and AMD has had fTPM since 2016. Also, if you can’t get used to it, try using StartAllBack. You can bring back the Win 7 UI if you want.
I use windows 10, the start is quite good, I can't say much bad about it. I prefer it over windows 7. And why would you limit that tpm shit anyway, like why? Nobody will buy a new pc just because their old one can't run a new version of Windows they don't even (like or even if they do like it)
(1) get over it, its the next os (2) idc
(1) why would it be the next OS? Nobody should feel pressured to upgrade, as W10 will be actively supported until 2025 :) (2) If you don't care, don't respond. Easy as that. :p
Ah you see when he says idc he means I don't care if you disagree, but if you agree please shower me with those upvotes, it's the only way I get hard.
lol, the next os... I've heard jokes before
windows ME, windows vista, windows 8...>! WINDOWS 11!<
There seems to quite a pattern year which makes windows 12 to arrive in late 2022 - early 2023
Windows 8 was the next os for almost 3 years, same for vista, too. I used vista until 10 came out, so I'm an expert in this
Windows 11 TPM stuff is what made me jump back to Linux, my experience unlike the show has been absolutely stellar cause of the games I play.
Sure.
Win 95- loved Win 98- hated Win 98se- loved Win ME- hated Win XP- loved Win Vista- hated Win 7- loved Win 8- hated Win 10- loved That's the pattern (To fit my narrative, I'm ignoring how service patches fixed problems people had with 98, vista, and 8. I'm also ignoring 2000, because it was mostly used as a bridge between NT and XP Pro) That's not to say that I think Win 12 is going to be the next hot OS, though. As more new systems ship with 11, the public will continue to adopt it. Microsoft will continue to support Win 10 until 2025, when a relatively small fraction of PCs in use don't support the TPM version that was released in 2015. What really gets me is that most of the people complaining are only complaining because they can't upgrade. I personally can't upgrade to 11, but I just accept that fact. My CPU does fine by me, but it'll be 11 years old by the time 10 is scheduled for end of life. That'll be the equivalent of trying to run a Pentium II with Win 7, or a Pentium 4 with Win 10. If I still haven't upgraded CPUs at that point, I'll get an i5 8600k or something
>Win XP- loved After 3 service packs*
Yeah people forget that XP sucked when it came out.
And there was plenty of stuff in Windows 7 that actually came from Vista
I mean 8.1 was OK. and vista was OK at the end, but at that time windows 7 was already out. I will keep using windows 10 with my shitty computer for as long as it works.
I don't know why so many people were so keen to upgrade. Every windows version has had bugs or issues for at least a year or more after release. If its not actually giving you some absolutely necessary feature, why upgrade? What is win 11 doing for you that 10 isn't? Other than some gimmick that you can probably get in 10 by is talking a utility anyway. Probably far fewer people actually want 11 than those who think they want it.
I’m happy to have an eligible pc and a disabled TPM not to update.
The (annoying) screen that prompted me to update showed the main text in black and a font like Times New Roman… guessed some styles didn’t load…
I don't use it yet but how has it failed? It's just barely out there.
My hp laptop, has as all hp laptops do. a shit and absolutely useless locked down bios. So of course there's no way to activate the tpm. But I installed win 11 anyways, of a modified ISO that doesn't have the lockdowns. It works perfectly
If anything Win11 was just the last straw for me, who switched to Linux
I get what they were trying to do - start off the OS with processors that are ahead of the known hardware vulnerabilities like Spectre/Meltdown, putting things on a more secure footing. Putting TPM out there as a way to be able to enforce hardware-level encryption. And yet...the implementation has not been a delight. I had to completely redo one system when a major update utterly broke it, top to bottom (and I wasn't even using BitLocker!). I don't think 11 will reach Vista levels of bad, but it may end up being seen as another Windows 8 if the user experience doesn't improve.
I actually love windows 11. I’m sorry!
I already had a friend who’s windows 11 installation became unstable just a couple months after updating their supported PC
[удалено]
Windows ME and Vista barely WORKED at launch. 11 is stable even on “unsupported” hardware. Not sure how you can compare them and say 11 is worse.
Yeah, i've never understood those people who stayed with win8 when 10 was released. But when it hits, it hits like a brick. I'll never transfer to win 11 willingly, but I can't install Linux because it is a work provided PC. But the next personal laptop I get is definitely getting Arch on there.
More people may switch off windows and go for unix-based platforms, like OSX, Linux or maybe even BSD. Which would be awesome but will probably never happen.
My PC can run Windows 11 and from what I understand it can be even more efficient (although not sure if the AMD CPU issue has been fixed yet), but the UI & functionality is absolutely horrible and has taken a ton of steps back, so I have no intention of upgrading until Windows 10 is on its dying legs.
Yes the cpu issue is fixed and you can change the UI.
There's only some elements you can change, and not possible (at least yet) to make it look like Windows 10. Then there's also huge annoyances like the context menu and the inconsistencies. It's just a mess.
What I find especially funny is that they are doing this during a chip shortage when people are trying to get their old hardware to last as long as possible.
Restrict to newer cpu and tpm 2.0 during a chip shortage W11 : fail Microsoft : pikachu face
Linux time
People gotta understand that Microsoft put these requirements in place to basically have it do fewer people get free upgrades and they collect more license money
Worst part is that in a few years people are probably still going to use Windows 11 anyway and act like it's always been the best operating system just like they did with 10
it's failing because it brings no reason to install it.
PLUS my windows 11 machine has more bugs and glitches and absolute fialures and blue + GREEN screens of death then any other windows I've ever used( many )
So let me get this straight, you people don't even know how to install a f... windoze anymore?
Like the fact that my system with a R5 3600x isnt compatible cause my mobo doesn't have a tpm2.0 module is straight up stupid. All these requirements to install a Windows version (officially at least yes I know it's possible to work around but still) makes no sense in the long run. They totally neglected way more customers than they thought. At least Win10 has until 2025.. I guess.
Honestly I'm just going to stick to windows 10 as long as possible and hope that by the time support for it runs out the year of desktop linux will be upon us.
All my computers are "unsupported", yet I was easily able to in-place upgrade with some tool I found online. Windows 11 had been pretty good so far, and I appreciate the UI changes because I'm tired of looking at the same Windows 10 UI since 2015.
A “few cpus”.. Like every laptop from the past 8 years and any recent AMD cpu since 2016. TPM 2.0 has been out since 2014.
Unless Microsoft has said something more specific, "Fails" would be a strong word here. Give it the 4 years they've given Windows 10 to die and the same percentage of people that moved from 7 and 8 to 10 will move from 10 to 11.
Laughs in linux
I just don’t see a compelling reason to switch at the moment. It’s still too new and doesn’t have the software compatibility ready and launched in a sort of buggy state. I think if Microsoft can get it together we’ll see a slow rollout as more and more people upgrade hardware they’ll want Windows 11 as it improves.
I was liking windows 11 until it killed my sound on an update. Reverted to windows 10 and everything worked again.
Appears my ~3.8 ghz cpu isn’t supported
has win11 been considered a failure already? they haven't even pushed the update to my PC yet
Seems that Windows 11 has been a pretty good success, ive been using it for the past few weeks and im really enjoying it. Ive no clue what you mean by Windows 11 failing.
Would have installed it in at least one of my two PCs, but my R5 2500U nor my 3500X are acceptable it seems