I'm sorry but come on. The writing has been on the wall for decades now. If you run Windows on your computer, it's not your computer, and you have to comply with whatever Microsoft says or does.
I haven't had Windows on my computer since Windows 7. Instead I've been using modern Linux distributions. This is freedom. My computer doesn't slow down, is lightning fast, and just works, year after year.
If you run Windows on your computer, it's not your computer, and you have to comply with whatever Microsoft says or does.
In this case, Windows 10 will continue to run on your computer perfectly fine. Microsoft are not changing anything about Windows 10, or the way people use Windows 10, or removing any Windows 10 'ownership' that people have right now.
The complaints are that Windows 11 has additional requirements (a modern CPU with a TMP 2.0 chip), and that older computers don't have that. Essentially people are sad that they can't upgrade because their computers don't meet the minimum spec. TMP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module) is a bit controversial, but you can run Windows without it. Just not Windows 11.
Although things might be different with Windows 10 and 11, people have had plenty of bad experiences with the previous versions.
For example, if we change the version number, we get a slightly different picture: "...Windows 7 will continue to run on your computer perfectly fine. Microsoft are not changing anything about Windows 7, or the way people use Windows 7, or removing any Windows 7 'ownership' that people have right now."
Remember Windows 7 having constant nag screens in it to upgrade? Remember Microsoft pushing their godawful Metro design, alongside a lack of a proper Start menu, before that was patched out? Remember people discovering that their OSes had forcefully upgraded after leaving their computers unattended for a while?
Given all of that, a bit of distrust is to be expected.
> In this case, Windows 10 will continue to run on your computer perfectly fine. Microsoft are not changing anything about Windows 10, or the way people use Windows 10, or removing any Windows 10 'ownership' that people have right now.
This isn't exactly comforting or acceptable. Windows 10 will stop receiving security updates in what, 5 years? I have a desktop computer from 2014 that I use daily, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. The amount of (unnecessary) ewaste Microsoft will create by going through with this decision is staggering.
> In this case, Windows 10 will continue to run on your computer perfectly fine.
Has it been confirmed anywhere that Win10 installations won't be automatically updated to Win11? Given the automatic nature of Win10 updates I'd expect that I'm waking up one morning, and be greeted by Win11 on my gaming PC (and since Win11 is just a marketing name for what's normally a Win10 feature update, this is most likely to happen, at least for Win10 Home users).
They enforce secure boot. Many vendors only have the MS CA implemented to check OS integrity. So you would have to get your OS certified by Microsoft...
I agree completely. I believe this to be an extremely bad failure at MS for product and company strategy. They basically own the PC OS market but jeapardize their own position massively. I meet devs that target Windows less and less.
That said, I might not really cry myself to sleep if people leave Windows behind.
Do you really think random people will leave Windows behind? And do what? Most of the average PC users don't even know there's an alternative (aside maybe for macs, which they probably consider overpriced, so not a direct alternative).
I think people who complain about this situation are people who know enough about computers to know that an "older" but higher-end computer would run just fine. The random Joe probably isn't running a 6th gen maxed-out i7, but some cheap low-end PC that they're used to having to change fairly regularly because it breaks for no reason.
I'm not defending MS here, but I think their strength is based on enterprise clients, where people change computers much more often, as based on their support contracts, and run-of-the-mill users who don't even think of "Windows" as being different from "the computer".
Power users are either "stuck" somehow on Windows (games, or other software that requires Windows) or are already on Linux. In the first case, it may be an issue, but they'll probably just grumpily whip out their card and upgrade. What else are they going to do?
I'm in the second situation and running a 3rd gen i7 and have no intention of upgrading it as long the computer works. But I only occasionally boot it in Windows to play some game. When games won't support Windows 10 anymore, I'll just play some other game.
This is the same exact thing that has been happening the past 40 years with this company and Windows.
Windows 10 was my fav version because that was the straw that broke the camels back for me and I would never even consider installing Windows at this point.
KDE Plasma is so vastly superior to Windows it isn't even close. I don't even work in IT either. A Dev intentionally using Windows is just embarrassing.
Yeah, it would be amazing if Adobe, DS, Autodesk, and others would somehow realize they should decouple their software from the OS and make a Linux version (that could even run on Windows).
Though right now the only problem I have is Windows restarting overnight for updates. Closing half the open programs.
Even though I explicitly set it to no auto restart if user logged on. Then again, it ignores the work time, too.
Me too. Today I turned on my Windows 7 machine for the first time in months. I checked my old Facebook account. I deleted some unwanted friend requests. I shut the Windows machine down and went back to the Linux machines.
> Today I turned on my Windows 7 machine for the first time in months. I checked my old Facebook account.
That's brave of you, I hope you had installed the latest security updates, which for Windows which hasn't been updated in months can take several hours, multiple reboots and has 1/10 chance to update successfully.
Update mechanism are another reason for someone to run Linux, Especially a rolling release distribution.
I totally agree. Ditched Windows a couple of years ago after using Windows and Linux. I didn't agree with Microsoft constantly changing privacy related settings through updates.
Linux for work and development. PS5 for gaming. I am happy that my complete household is Microsoft free.
Linux is great and a lot of progress has been made on the gaming front lately. However, if you want to play all the latest AAA titles at their highest fidelity, there's no choice but to use Windows.
Yes, and? Computers are so much more than gaming devices, it makes no sense to restrict yourself just by that one facet. Or should I use a PlayStation as my main computer just because it has exclusive titles I like?
At the moment, it would seem apple is at least a bit more responsible with their walled garden. Their users don't get served ads, aren't forced to have Teams now always running, and in general are subject to far less bloatware.
of course you can make the hardline FOSS argument but compared to say, the phone OS market Windows is actually remarkably open, in particular given how dominant it is and especially was.
Imagine if Windows had charged every developer who ever built anything on windows 30% of their revenue. They got almost bludgeoned to death for shipping a default browser 20 years ago.
Windows deserves a lot of criticism but we take it for granted that a monopolist basically just sold an operating system and let everyone run and build whatever they wanted on top of it, we could've been fucked way worse.
> Instead I've been using modern Linux distributions. This is freedom. My computer doesn't slow down, is lightning fast, and just works, year after year.
That doesn't match my experience of modern Linux at all. Plenty of forced "upgrades" that broke things, sometimes leaving me with an unbootable system (systemd).
Nobody should run a linux distro that has systemd in it, but thankfully you have many many options for that that don't involve running an OS with terrible hardware support (and a small community to boot).
My computer doesn't slow down, is lightning fast, and just works, year after year.
Can say that about pretty much any OS, highly depending on what exactly it is you do with it, and if you happen to be lucky enough that you're the one which doesnt't have one single problem. Especially the 'just works' bit rings much less bells for me when it comes to Linux than it does for other OS. Which kinda harms the feeling of freedom I get from it.
As someone who worked both in IT support and has parents who use compiters despite not knowing how to use them, this is not true.
I had a ton of issues with Windows when my mother used it (despite me being a long time Windows user and offering her remote assistence). At one point I got so fed up with yet another update that fucked things up (=changed the UI she was used to) that I decided to install Ubuntu. My mother was happy with the new system and the number of times I had to support her was one thenth of what it was before.
OSX is also not without pitfalls, especially the updates can break a lot of existing setups (hardware...)
Linux is great for real power users or real beginners, not so great for intermediate people who know enough to fuck a system up for good. But if you are a beginner or a power user it just works unless you fuck it up.
With Windows and OSX it just works till they decide to fuck it up, even if you are trying to actively prevent it.
Microsoft really is trying hard to get Windows 11 to fail. They still haven't realized most people don't feel the urge to update unless its 100% painless or it's necessary. If you alienate or disgrunt the "techies", ie those who recommend people what to do with their tech, you are going to get people that remove 11 to install 10, or holdouts on older versions. That's the way it is. IT Departments won't maintain two separate versions of Windows, so expect 10 to remain the default everywhere until 2025.
If they’re not automatically installed, they’ll never be installed. They’ll upgrade to Windows 11 when they buy a new computer. The idea of downgrading won’t cross their mind because the operating system and hardware are not distinct, decoupled components—if they don’t like Windows 11 they’ll just learn to live with it because that’s just how new computers are.
If what you've described was indeed the case Vista would have taken off eventually, but it didn't and it barely touch a 20% of the market in almost 3 years of being exclusively sold by OEM on new machines. In the Enterprise market, it probably never reached a 1% of all installs.
The reason for this phenomenon is in my experience that most computers are actually managed by a vast public of "techies", i.e. people that are computer literate enough to reinstall an OS and to provide support to their computer illiterate relatives and friends. These people tend to be vastly over assess their IT knowledge, and are very vulnerable to "rumors" spread on forums and blogs. This makes them very prone to becoming zealot about random topics they hear on the internet (like "Windows 8 sucks", or "Linux is bad").
When a non-techie gets a new computer with a new Windows version, they often can't figure out how to accomplish even the most basic things - or rather, they don't care and don't want to invest the time to tinker with the new system, generally. They then rely on their own "trusted" person for that, and one frequent answer they get is that the new Windows version is crap and they offer to downgrade their computer. I've seen this happen a lot with both Vista and 8, EVERYONE was downgrading PCs back then without a good reason for doing so. I even saw PC shops recommending to downgrade before selling a computer, with leaflets advertising for the service on the front desk.
I saw a high school buy Core 2 Quad machines in 2008 and wipe away Vista in favour of XP, even though they only needed the machines for Office and Autocad, and there was thus absolutely no reason whatsoever for doing so, given how beefy the machines were back then and that Vista SP1 had basically fixed the OS. The main motivation behind this was the stigma around Vista, and the fact the IT department was full of low-skilled technicians that got their training from pinned threads in PC forums. It was rare to find anyone using Vista back then, even on new computers, unless they were basically grandparents whose grandchildren lived far away.
For what I've learned in these years, the first month or so a new Windows version comes out is crucial and it foreshadows how well it's going to fare with users. If there's even a slight hint of doubt it could be bad the users immediately reject it, it gets stigmatized and it is basically dead in the water.
It's very diffierent in the Apple ecosystem in my opinion. People are usually nonchalant, even excited about upgrading. I think that's how Microsoft want people in the Windows ecosystem to feel, but it's just not refined enough for that to happen.
That's not my experience at all. People are just as wary about upgrading Apple devices. I've seen it among friends and family. They're afraid things will break or their device will slow down or everything will move around and they'll have to relearn how to use their device again.
Practically. And people will be so elated with Win 12, when the stupid changed will be normalized somewhat. I feel like I'm being courted by a pickup artist.
They already disgruntled a lot of devs with their environments. .net core still lives, but anything else seems like a wasteland. There are still a lot of VS Basic and C# devs, but it at least seems their number is decreasing.
It is really a problem to get someone that knows the tech if you have to interface it for some mundane Office tasks.
Interfacing their Graph API is a horror show that I recommend to any dev about how not to do security.
“Deleted all comments” is click bait IMO. This is a YouTube video, so the choice is either to allow commenting, or disable the comment section with all existing comments with it. The title reads to me to imply MS is doing some kind of censoring. Yeah that is one of the result of what they’ve done, and that might be the main intention, but heavily implying this in the title without evidence is bad journalism.
Actually, that's not true. I entered a mildly critical comment on a YouTube video the other day, very spot on if I do say so. It immediately got a bunch of upvotes, then that stopped completely. My comment was on top still, but that's just how YouTube displays your own comments.
But when checking the video without logging in to YouTube, my comment was gone.
So it looks like comments can be quietly deleted without the commenter even knowing it.
There are two possibilities, and the following isn't a valid choice, so...
"Microsoft disables comments because of overwhelmingly positive reception of Windows 11!"
They don't want to deal with criticism and likely consider everything a sunk cost, so it is what it is and nothing will change.
It's kind of funny. I recall watching the recent Apple developer conference live on Youtube and the comments section had been turned off. What are these giant tech companies afraid of?
Comment sections on youtube are usually at best useless, and at worst very toxic.
I would disable them as well, not because of 'being afraid of anything' but because it's a net loss to have them enabled, and nothing of value is lost if they are disabled.
I said this on a previous win11 post here, and I'll say it again. I don't want telemetry on my machine, I don't want to jump through loops to turn it off, I don't want Teams on my machine (are we back in ie6 territory again?), I don't want a 'must be connected to the internet' operating system.
After 20 or so years of using Windows at home, I think I'm probably done with Microsoft.
Linux and KDE satisfies all requirements now, and in fact my machine is dual boot and I haven't booted into Windows in weeks.
The only thing I'll miss is Visual Studio, but I have a Jetbrains license, so that's fine.
It makes me wonder: why does Microsoft take this risk now? Switching to Linux was so much more painful 20 years ago. Switching to Mac is probably easier than ever. So why, instead of encouraging their users to stay, they do everything to alienate them? Of course, the majority will stay because of inertia, especially in the enterprise. But it paints a bleak future for Windows.
With Windows 10 Home forced upgrades I saw again something that I haven't seen since Windows 95: a growing feeling among users that their OS, which just supposed to work, is overtly hostile to them. You can hold it just a bit and then it will reboot against your will and you just hope all your work, settings and so on was saved. Your OS is getting in your way, it prevents your work being done, just like Windows 95 did with constant crashing. Once these things have piled up, users seriously start looking for an alternative. My parents, for example, switched to iPad Pros and haven't regretted it. This might not be possible now for all users yet, but we're getting there, and Microsoft seems to be as blind to this aspect as in the 90s.
Does the user have any control of the operating system on an iPad? Why should Windows hardware be any different? You are making a contradictory argument.
What has happened is that the computer has changed, it is no longer the big old tower but mobile phones, tablets and laptops. And the laptop and tablet space is already merging as laptops that has a touch display or a tablet with a keyboard.
Where the tower could be upgraded part by part including the operating system, the new type of computer doesn’t. The consumer usually buys a new one within a few years. This is where Windows 11 fits in.
I wouldn’t be surprised if you rent your computer in the future, you already have phones, which is a computer, with carrier subscription. This will of course also reduce user control even more. Combined that with the cloud computing and your computer is more of a client on a corporate controlled network.
I wouldn't say Windows is getting in my way any more than KDE, or MacOS (I own an Apple laptop, a Windows laptop, and a Win/Linux PC).
It's just not what I want or need in an OS any more. I develop on and for Linux.
I don't expect my friends to switch from Windows because they're not that techie.
But consider that in 2001 you'd go to a download page and the option would be "Windows only", and in 2021, you can go to a download page and it can now be "Mac only" or no Windows option at all.
I’ve been very surprised by Macs. If you told me forty years ago that I’d be using a MacBook one day I wouldn’t have believed you - they were always the fringe systems that couldn’t integrate with anything except the alien spaceships in Independence Day and the users were always marketing darlings that could not find anything that wasn’t visible on the screen in front of them.
However fast forward to today and Macs integrate very well into the environment, the development tools are free, you can throw iterm2 on and have a very nice Unix environment, add in Docker and you have a pleasant Linux environment at your disposal as well. Microsoft stuff works well enough - Teams on Linux is a real pig that consumes all memory and CPU, and drops audio randomly - but that is completely on Microsoft.
Apple has its own issues but if your not developing MacOS kernel extensions you can steer clear of most of it. Pay your $100 for Apple Care or your a third class citizen. I’ve seen Apple replace iPhones that had obviously been clawed open with a fork with a smile if you had Apple Care but they won’t do jack if you don’t have it.
> If you told me forty years ago that I’d be using a MacBook one day I wouldn’t have believed you - they were always the fringe systems that couldn’t integrate
40 years ago, the Mac had not been released yet. Hell, neither had the IBM PC, MS-DOS 1.0, or even the Commodore 64.
At the time, people would endlessly complain about every new version or even small change, too. I don't remember the complaining to be worse for the (in hindsight) worse versions. Plus it's only the complaints that you hear about, very few people will rave about how great something is. Personally I thought that Windows 7 was a majors step backwards from XP and avoided it, skipping straight to 8, which I thought was great.
More and more we saw in the latest Microsoft products (also other companys) really bad ui and features. Nobody want have these features exept some marketing people. Nobody use these features .. they are just anyoing as hell, like the actual save file dualog in office, the 3D directory in home etc .. For a time it might work, after a while your product is just a piece of broke shit.
The outrage that they release a new major version that requires new hardware is…weird.
This is exactly like someone who bought a PS4 realizing that some new games require a PS5 (change my mind)
If Microsoft had made this in the 2022 update of Win10, that would have been outrageous. And if they stopped patching Win10 that would have been bad too. But it’s neither of those. It’s entirely new software for new hardware.
> The outrage that they release a new major version that requires new hardware is…weird.
My impression is that the outrage is because the requirement is... weird. As in artificial. It will support new, lower-end CPUs, but not older, more powerful CPUs.
I seem to remember the cutoff was 8th gen Intels. A friend has an XPS with a 7th gen i7H. That thing is much more powerful than the dinky i5u I have in my work laptop, but since mine is 8th gen it will be able to run Win 11, but not his. My desktop has an overclocked 3rd gen i7 that runs circles around both of the laptops combined. Can't run win11 either.
I get there's the TPM thing, although it's not clear to me why it's so important or whether it's not at all possible (as opposed to just uncommon) to have a TPM v2 on an older than 8th gen CPU.
That's the invisible hand of Intel pushing their good buddy MS to burry the Meltdown/Spectre vulnerable family of products from officially supported software. EDIT:Or at least those family of products too old to be patched to a sufficient degree. Once you view the product requirements through that lens, it makes a lot more sense. Additionally the TPM/Secure Boot requirements allow them better "control" for lack of a better word over OEM Windows licensing, but their masquerading it as a security feature (even though w10 supports it) kinda blew up in their face.
Between that and trying to push a new MS store that allows them to take a cut of 3rd party software a la the play store/steam/etc is the real reason Microsoft suddenly switched gears from W10 being the "last" version of Windows to "hey guys, everyone upgrade to W11, it's totally different see, we moved the start menu!"
> MS to burry the Meltdown/Spectre vulnerable family
> Once you view the product requirements through that lens, it makes a lot more sense.
No it doesn't. You can disable these mitigations in kernel right now and there is no guarantee that intel won't have any vulnerabilities in future micro-architectures. So you need the support to enable/disable future mitigations in kernel anyway.
If they were saying you'd need more disk space or a faster CPU, I'm sure people would be more understanding. But the new restrictions feel very "artificial" - there doesn't seem to be an obvious need for them to not support old (but relatively recent) CPUs any longer, and I cannot fathom why having a TPM should be a hard requirement.
> The outrage that they release a new major version
I have the feeling that it's a bit inherent to OS releases in general. I'm very interested in macOS release news, but if I come here for the discussion, it's overwhelmingly negative. I'd like to see positive discussion about how new features can benefit me, but it's just not there.
Readit News
I haven't had Windows on my computer since Windows 7. Instead I've been using modern Linux distributions. This is freedom. My computer doesn't slow down, is lightning fast, and just works, year after year.
In this case, Windows 10 will continue to run on your computer perfectly fine. Microsoft are not changing anything about Windows 10, or the way people use Windows 10, or removing any Windows 10 'ownership' that people have right now.
The complaints are that Windows 11 has additional requirements (a modern CPU with a TMP 2.0 chip), and that older computers don't have that. Essentially people are sad that they can't upgrade because their computers don't meet the minimum spec. TMP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module) is a bit controversial, but you can run Windows without it. Just not Windows 11.
For example, if we change the version number, we get a slightly different picture: "...Windows 7 will continue to run on your computer perfectly fine. Microsoft are not changing anything about Windows 7, or the way people use Windows 7, or removing any Windows 7 'ownership' that people have right now."
Remember Windows 7 having constant nag screens in it to upgrade? Remember Microsoft pushing their godawful Metro design, alongside a lack of a proper Start menu, before that was patched out? Remember people discovering that their OSes had forcefully upgraded after leaving their computers unattended for a while?
Given all of that, a bit of distrust is to be expected.
This isn't exactly comforting or acceptable. Windows 10 will stop receiving security updates in what, 5 years? I have a desktop computer from 2014 that I use daily, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. The amount of (unnecessary) ewaste Microsoft will create by going through with this decision is staggering.
You haven't been doing this long enough if you believe that.
Has it been confirmed anywhere that Win10 installations won't be automatically updated to Win11? Given the automatic nature of Win10 updates I'd expect that I'm waking up one morning, and be greeted by Win11 on my gaming PC (and since Win11 is just a marketing name for what's normally a Win10 feature update, this is most likely to happen, at least for Win10 Home users).
https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/courses/compsci725s2c/archive/...
That said, I might not really cry myself to sleep if people leave Windows behind.
I think people who complain about this situation are people who know enough about computers to know that an "older" but higher-end computer would run just fine. The random Joe probably isn't running a 6th gen maxed-out i7, but some cheap low-end PC that they're used to having to change fairly regularly because it breaks for no reason.
I'm not defending MS here, but I think their strength is based on enterprise clients, where people change computers much more often, as based on their support contracts, and run-of-the-mill users who don't even think of "Windows" as being different from "the computer".
Power users are either "stuck" somehow on Windows (games, or other software that requires Windows) or are already on Linux. In the first case, it may be an issue, but they'll probably just grumpily whip out their card and upgrade. What else are they going to do?
I'm in the second situation and running a 3rd gen i7 and have no intention of upgrading it as long the computer works. But I only occasionally boot it in Windows to play some game. When games won't support Windows 10 anymore, I'll just play some other game.
Windows 10 was my fav version because that was the straw that broke the camels back for me and I would never even consider installing Windows at this point.
KDE Plasma is so vastly superior to Windows it isn't even close. I don't even work in IT either. A Dev intentionally using Windows is just embarrassing.
Though right now the only problem I have is Windows restarting overnight for updates. Closing half the open programs.
Even though I explicitly set it to no auto restart if user logged on. Then again, it ignores the work time, too.
That's brave of you, I hope you had installed the latest security updates, which for Windows which hasn't been updated in months can take several hours, multiple reboots and has 1/10 chance to update successfully.
Update mechanism are another reason for someone to run Linux, Especially a rolling release distribution.
Linux for work and development. PS5 for gaming. I am happy that my complete household is Microsoft free.
Dead Comment
Valve is working together with AAA publishers to get better Linux support.
WSL2 is a game changer.
You can still create a local account and login to your PC without a callback to Microsoft.
"Johnathan Smith" => "johna" == yuck.
Imagine if Windows had charged every developer who ever built anything on windows 30% of their revenue. They got almost bludgeoned to death for shipping a default browser 20 years ago.
Windows deserves a lot of criticism but we take it for granted that a monopolist basically just sold an operating system and let everyone run and build whatever they wanted on top of it, we could've been fucked way worse.
That doesn't match my experience of modern Linux at all. Plenty of forced "upgrades" that broke things, sometimes leaving me with an unbootable system (systemd).
I switched to FreeBSD and things are much better.
1. Win 10 was promised to be the "last Windows", updated like a rolling distro.
2. Minimum system requirements are raised in a way that leaves behind "as many as 60 percent" of hardware that's otherwise fine.
3. Home edition cannot be set up with a local account.
Dead Comment
Can say that about pretty much any OS, highly depending on what exactly it is you do with it, and if you happen to be lucky enough that you're the one which doesnt't have one single problem. Especially the 'just works' bit rings much less bells for me when it comes to Linux than it does for other OS. Which kinda harms the feeling of freedom I get from it.
I had a ton of issues with Windows when my mother used it (despite me being a long time Windows user and offering her remote assistence). At one point I got so fed up with yet another update that fucked things up (=changed the UI she was used to) that I decided to install Ubuntu. My mother was happy with the new system and the number of times I had to support her was one thenth of what it was before.
OSX is also not without pitfalls, especially the updates can break a lot of existing setups (hardware...)
Linux is great for real power users or real beginners, not so great for intermediate people who know enough to fuck a system up for good. But if you are a beginner or a power user it just works unless you fuck it up.
With Windows and OSX it just works till they decide to fuck it up, even if you are trying to actively prevent it.
If they’re not automatically installed, they’ll never be installed. They’ll upgrade to Windows 11 when they buy a new computer. The idea of downgrading won’t cross their mind because the operating system and hardware are not distinct, decoupled components—if they don’t like Windows 11 they’ll just learn to live with it because that’s just how new computers are.
The reason for this phenomenon is in my experience that most computers are actually managed by a vast public of "techies", i.e. people that are computer literate enough to reinstall an OS and to provide support to their computer illiterate relatives and friends. These people tend to be vastly over assess their IT knowledge, and are very vulnerable to "rumors" spread on forums and blogs. This makes them very prone to becoming zealot about random topics they hear on the internet (like "Windows 8 sucks", or "Linux is bad").
When a non-techie gets a new computer with a new Windows version, they often can't figure out how to accomplish even the most basic things - or rather, they don't care and don't want to invest the time to tinker with the new system, generally. They then rely on their own "trusted" person for that, and one frequent answer they get is that the new Windows version is crap and they offer to downgrade their computer. I've seen this happen a lot with both Vista and 8, EVERYONE was downgrading PCs back then without a good reason for doing so. I even saw PC shops recommending to downgrade before selling a computer, with leaflets advertising for the service on the front desk.
I saw a high school buy Core 2 Quad machines in 2008 and wipe away Vista in favour of XP, even though they only needed the machines for Office and Autocad, and there was thus absolutely no reason whatsoever for doing so, given how beefy the machines were back then and that Vista SP1 had basically fixed the OS. The main motivation behind this was the stigma around Vista, and the fact the IT department was full of low-skilled technicians that got their training from pinned threads in PC forums. It was rare to find anyone using Vista back then, even on new computers, unless they were basically grandparents whose grandchildren lived far away.
For what I've learned in these years, the first month or so a new Windows version comes out is crucial and it foreshadows how well it's going to fare with users. If there's even a slight hint of doubt it could be bad the users immediately reject it, it gets stigmatized and it is basically dead in the water.
It's every other version:
95 - ok (because we didn't know better)
me - nope
XP - ok
Vista - nope
7 - ok
8 - double nope
10 - ok
11 - ...nope?
It is really a problem to get someone that knows the tech if you have to interface it for some mundane Office tasks.
Interfacing their Graph API is a horror show that I recommend to any dev about how not to do security.
But when checking the video without logging in to YouTube, my comment was gone.
So it looks like comments can be quietly deleted without the commenter even knowing it.
THAT is censorship.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banning
They don't want to deal with criticism and likely consider everything a sunk cost, so it is what it is and nothing will change.
I would disable them as well, not because of 'being afraid of anything' but because it's a net loss to have them enabled, and nothing of value is lost if they are disabled.
Title should read "Microsoft disables comments under heavily criticized Windows 11 upgrade video"
Clickbait.
After 20 or so years of using Windows at home, I think I'm probably done with Microsoft.
Linux and KDE satisfies all requirements now, and in fact my machine is dual boot and I haven't booted into Windows in weeks.
The only thing I'll miss is Visual Studio, but I have a Jetbrains license, so that's fine.
With Windows 10 Home forced upgrades I saw again something that I haven't seen since Windows 95: a growing feeling among users that their OS, which just supposed to work, is overtly hostile to them. You can hold it just a bit and then it will reboot against your will and you just hope all your work, settings and so on was saved. Your OS is getting in your way, it prevents your work being done, just like Windows 95 did with constant crashing. Once these things have piled up, users seriously start looking for an alternative. My parents, for example, switched to iPad Pros and haven't regretted it. This might not be possible now for all users yet, but we're getting there, and Microsoft seems to be as blind to this aspect as in the 90s.
What has happened is that the computer has changed, it is no longer the big old tower but mobile phones, tablets and laptops. And the laptop and tablet space is already merging as laptops that has a touch display or a tablet with a keyboard.
Where the tower could be upgraded part by part including the operating system, the new type of computer doesn’t. The consumer usually buys a new one within a few years. This is where Windows 11 fits in.
I wouldn’t be surprised if you rent your computer in the future, you already have phones, which is a computer, with carrier subscription. This will of course also reduce user control even more. Combined that with the cloud computing and your computer is more of a client on a corporate controlled network.
The PC, Personal Computer, is dead.
It's just not what I want or need in an OS any more. I develop on and for Linux.
I don't expect my friends to switch from Windows because they're not that techie.
But consider that in 2001 you'd go to a download page and the option would be "Windows only", and in 2021, you can go to a download page and it can now be "Mac only" or no Windows option at all.
There's a slow shift away from MS.
Apparently everyone is going to switch since Windows XP.
However fast forward to today and Macs integrate very well into the environment, the development tools are free, you can throw iterm2 on and have a very nice Unix environment, add in Docker and you have a pleasant Linux environment at your disposal as well. Microsoft stuff works well enough - Teams on Linux is a real pig that consumes all memory and CPU, and drops audio randomly - but that is completely on Microsoft.
Apple has its own issues but if your not developing MacOS kernel extensions you can steer clear of most of it. Pay your $100 for Apple Care or your a third class citizen. I’ve seen Apple replace iPhones that had obviously been clawed open with a fork with a smile if you had Apple Care but they won’t do jack if you don’t have it.
40 years ago, the Mac had not been released yet. Hell, neither had the IBM PC, MS-DOS 1.0, or even the Commodore 64.
This happened during Windows XP days (and I think one which still continues!), Windows 7 and Windows 8.
I don't expect things to be any different this time around!
You're claiming that XP was worse than ME?
This is exactly like someone who bought a PS4 realizing that some new games require a PS5 (change my mind)
If Microsoft had made this in the 2022 update of Win10, that would have been outrageous. And if they stopped patching Win10 that would have been bad too. But it’s neither of those. It’s entirely new software for new hardware.
My impression is that the outrage is because the requirement is... weird. As in artificial. It will support new, lower-end CPUs, but not older, more powerful CPUs.
I seem to remember the cutoff was 8th gen Intels. A friend has an XPS with a 7th gen i7H. That thing is much more powerful than the dinky i5u I have in my work laptop, but since mine is 8th gen it will be able to run Win 11, but not his. My desktop has an overclocked 3rd gen i7 that runs circles around both of the laptops combined. Can't run win11 either.
I get there's the TPM thing, although it's not clear to me why it's so important or whether it's not at all possible (as opposed to just uncommon) to have a TPM v2 on an older than 8th gen CPU.
If not, then I really don't get it.
Between that and trying to push a new MS store that allows them to take a cut of 3rd party software a la the play store/steam/etc is the real reason Microsoft suddenly switched gears from W10 being the "last" version of Windows to "hey guys, everyone upgrade to W11, it's totally different see, we moved the start menu!"
No it doesn't. You can disable these mitigations in kernel right now and there is no guarantee that intel won't have any vulnerabilities in future micro-architectures. So you need the support to enable/disable future mitigations in kernel anyway.
I have the feeling that it's a bit inherent to OS releases in general. I'm very interested in macOS release news, but if I come here for the discussion, it's overwhelmingly negative. I'd like to see positive discussion about how new features can benefit me, but it's just not there.