Microsoft announces Windows 11 with redesigned UI, Start Menu, and Store

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
Are you sure? Because Microsoft's systems requirements page, and some articles I've read on other sites, sure make it seem like DX12 support is a hard requirement that's mandatory just for getting into the desktop.
The test system I am using to try out Windows 11 on has a GTX560 GPU, which is not a DX12 GPU. It's working just fine. In fact, no GPU drivers are installed during installation(no internet connection is used as I disallow it). I am certain the DX12 requirement is false.
I see. It could be just a way to prevent a "leaked" alpha build from "leaking too much".
Very likely.
Still, there's nothing keeping Microsoft to change that to an actual requirement. Who knows. Maybe they're "testing the waters".
Not true. Microsoft would indeed meet a great deal of resistance if they enforced the requirements of UEFI, TPM and SecureBoot as a great many PC's in the world do not have these features and can not attain them. More than half the world in fact still runs on non-UEFI BIOS. Less than 10% have TPM at all let alone TPM 2.0. A similarly small percentage have SecureBoot. UEFI will eventually be dominant. But not everyone needs TPM or SecureBoot and they should not forced on everyone. Microsoft will encounter very extreme resistance if they try.
 
Last edited:

arrowflash

Posts: 460   +498
The test system I am using to try out Windows 11 on has a GTX560 GPU, which is not a DX12 GPU. It's working just fine. In fact, no GPU drivers are installed during installation(no internet connection is allowed). I am certain the DX12 requirement is false.

Oh no, this only makes things even more confusing. I did some research and looks like the GTX 560 has partial support for DirectX 12:

"The GeForce GTX 560 was a performance-segment graphics card by NVIDIA, launched on May 17th, 2011. Built on the 40 nm process, and based on the GF114 graphics processor, in its GF114-325-A1 variant, the card supports DirectX 12. Even though it supports DirectX 12, the feature level is only 11_0, which can be problematic with newer DirectX 12 titles."

It's a valid concern and I'm pretty sure the disproportionate interest Valve has put into Proton (relative to market share) is just as much some quiet long-term "backup plan" as it is simply being nice to Linux users. About the only other defence against that would be a massive anti-competition lawsuit for tens / hundreds of billions by every major game store combined vs Microsoft (no other store sells UWP games = it would be active sabotage) or national security issues (a lot of critical infrastructure use Win32 based apps in a lot of countries), and before someone comments, "Win32 API" means both 32 & 64 bit variants of what makes traditional Windows applications, ie, stuff that isn't UWP based.

Yes, I had already noticed long ago that the emphasis Valve is placing on Linux might have something to do with the direction Microsoft is taking Windows.

I find some class-action lawsuit or government intervention unlikely if Microsoft ever tries to pull it off. Realistically, they'd probably do it in a gradual manner so even institutional users that use software developed in-house could capitulate - for example, they could initially only remove Win32 from Home editions of Windows, then remove Win32 software from the Microsoft store and Pro editions later, and they'd remove Win32 from Enterprise editions only after the vast majority of software already are UWP only.
 

mattferg

Posts: 180   +173
It's a valid concern and I'm pretty sure the disproportionate interest Valve has put into Proton (relative to market share) is just as much some quiet long-term "backup plan" as it is simply being nice to Linux users. About the only other defence against that would be a massive anti-competition lawsuit for tens / hundreds of billions by every major game store combined vs Microsoft (no other store sells UWP games = it would be active sabotage) or national security issues (a lot of critical infrastructure use Win32 based apps in a lot of countries), and before someone comments, "Win32 API" means both 32 & 64 bit variants of what makes traditional Windows applications, ie, stuff that isn't UWP based.

Steam has some UWP games.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
Oh no, this only makes things even more confusing. I did some research and looks like the GTX 560 has partial support for DirectX 12:

"The GeForce GTX 560 was a performance-segment graphics card by NVIDIA, launched on May 17th, 2011. Built on the 40 nm process, and based on the GF114 graphics processor, in its GF114-325-A1 variant, the card supports DirectX 12. Even though it supports DirectX 12, the feature level is only 11_0, which can be problematic with newer DirectX 12 titles."
News to me. Didn't know that.
 

CybaGirl

Posts: 69   +29
Did they put in a secret method to disable auto updates when I disappear from the pc for a few hours?

Just do what I do and download and run this program. That way you can turn Windows Updates off an on when you want to. I realise this program is for Windows 10 but I am sure the developer will make or upgrade this program to support Windows 11 when it is officially released.

He also has lots of other nice little tools that I have installed and use often.

Windows Update Blocker
 

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
MS trying to put my 6 core Xeon out to pasture. Time to look at ChromeOS and alternatives
No, it's time to make noise and tell Microsoft where to shove this inappropriate BS.

What's wrong with UEFI?
Nothing. But not all computers that can easily run Windows 11 have UEFI. Even more do not have TPM2.0 or SecureBoot. By making these requirements Microsoft is screwing over a large portion of the computing public, which is complete nonsense and unacceptable.

It's a smart move. Security is too important right now that we need to move forward.
No, it's a moronic move and a lot of people will not tolerate it. There are better ways to secure a system. MOST(99%) people do NOT need TPM or SecureBoot. This is Microsoft trying to control the public. We need to give them a pair of middle fingers front and center!
 
Last edited:

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
Has UEFI, Secure Boot and TPM ever stopped malware or ransomware?
Short answer: No.

Long answer:
UEFI is not about security at all. It's always been about bringing BIOS firmware into the modern era of computing with customizable and easily updateable features.

TPM(Trusted Platform Module) IS very much about security but only to protect hardware(PC's/Latops/Etc.) from unauthorized use. This does nothing for the average user.

SecureBoot is also about security, but not for the user. SecureBoot makes modifying the software behind the SecureBoot runtimes nearly impossible. It effectively make the OS difficult to alter, even for the owner of the system in question. In simpler words, it locks down the OS so the user can not make changes to it. It has nothing to do with protecting the user on any level.

Amazing that in 2021 there are still drones drinking the kool-aid. These "features" are not about security, it never was. It's all about control, all about removing choice and freedom from users.
Absolutely True!
 
Last edited:

Eldritch

Posts: 340   +522
I share the concern about forcing new so called 'secure boot' options because it will leave a large number of people out but again, if Microsoft thinks its good idea to force certain people out then let them. As obviously, all this will be bypassed within days. These bypassed systems are less likely to participate in store purchases etc due to fear of card theft and spywares.
Only person losing revenue will be MS and customers will be at risk of malwares. Lose, Lose! Brilliant!
 

arrowflash

Posts: 460   +498
Short answer: No.

Long answer:

Thanks for the detailed answer! Nailed it.

In the eyes of big tech, the open PC architecture standard that came about in 1981 with the IBM PC and we still use today (albeit in an almost unrecognizable evolved form it still carries the IBM PC legacy), was a huge mistake. They've been doing everything they can to lock it down as much as possible with the introduction of standards such as UEFI, Secure Boot and TPM, while they're not successful in swaying users to a new legacy-free platform (that's what I think the push for ARM is truly all about).

I never liked UEFI because I've always seen it as another step in making the PC architecture a less open platform, and most of the touted benefits of UEFI could have been added to the classic BIOS if the industry really wanted. "But muh fast boot". Oh please, my PC booting in classic BIOS boot mode, has the desktop fully loaded in less than 15 seconds. Unless I'm doing some testing or troubleshooting I only boot my PC once a day, so booting in 7 or 8 seconds instead of 15 makes no difference to me...
 

ilovelinux

Posts: 45   +139
Apparently Intel processors older than 8th won't support Win 11. Link: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/wi...pported/windows-11-supported-intel-processors

I also had trouble installing 20H2 on a 5th gen processor. Finally I installed 1809 and upgraded it via windows update. That seems to work just fine.

Planned obsolescense isn't doing you any good, chewtiya nadella.

Linux is also a big pain with many restrictions. This makes me want to quit using computers, if I ever could...
 

McMurdeR

Posts: 325   +318
With Teams integration, it sounds like this is more designed for professionals. So, perhaps M$ wants to alienate home users? :facepalm: For my home machines, Teams is just another piece of crapware. This is the modern M$, I guess. :rolleyes:

Business is where they make their revenue in fairness. Teams is a big deal in that space, especially since the pandemic. And one of the things that makes it work well is it's integration with other MS platforms.

I totally get your point, but as a home user I'll forego a few niggles in exchange for a decent free update with useful new features.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,228   +498
2015: “Windows 10 is the last version of Windows” - Microsoft.

2021: "Microsoft announces Windows 11"

If nothing else, those guys are consistent and stick to their word.
 

Loadedaxe

Posts: 50   +73
What about the stringent system requirements? They are supposedly "security-related" and a lot of devices are being left out.

Hey, I guess these may change too. Windows 10 was "the final version" after all.

Any PC manufactured in the last 7 years will work. Even Skylake and Zen 1. All you have to do is enable PTT (Intel) or fTPM (AMD) in the bios.
 

DZillaXx

Posts: 325   +447
More than half the world in fact still runs on non-UEFI BIOS. Less than 10% have TPM at all let alone TPM 2.0. A similarly small percentage have SecureBoot. UEFI will eventually be dominant. But not everyone needs TPM or SecureBoot and they should not forced on everyone. Microsoft will encounter very extreme resistance if they try.

That is by far false, UEFI is pretty much standard on nearly all post Sandy Bridge hardware. And Pre Sandy Bridge UEFI was still widely used. I don't think there are a whole lot of a Core2 Machines still in use. I know there are still plenty of these machines in the wild, but all of them are nearly all in industrial or commercial applications that are pretty much single purpose. It has been a long time since I've seen such a machine in a workplace used for actual work. We're talking about machines that are around 12-15 years old.



I'm actually conflicted with this Windows 11 update. They seem to have gotten rid of some of the things I actually enjoy about window's 10 UI, like the current Start Menu. It honestly works great and I like the title area for my shortcuts to the many apps I use for work. Still waiting on tabbed File Explorer, doesn't seem like they addressed this in windows 11 yet....
 

DZillaXx

Posts: 325   +447
Business is where they make their revenue in fairness. Teams is a big deal in that space, especially since the pandemic. And one of the things that makes it work well is it's integration with other MS platforms.

I totally get your point, but as a home user I'll forego a few niggles in exchange for a decent free update with useful new features.

MS's entire 365 suite justs craps on any alt option for the Money. The Only IT Admins pushing GSuite are the ones that can't figure out MS's unneedly complex admin consoles. For about the same cost Share Point, Azure AD, 365 Email (Outlook), and all the 365 Apps are simply the way to go. GSuite is pretty much a worse option in nearly every way.

I just see MS trying to bring the whole cost and infrastructure down for home users so they can pretty much have a home based Azure AD/365 combo keeping their user data in the cloud backed up ready for users to jump between devices with a single MS Login.
 

Geralt

Posts: 554   +766
It only requires UEFI installation of Windows and TPM, not secure boot. I did the check with secure boot disabled and no problem to install Windows 11.
 

TheBigT42

Posts: 566   +509
The real news will be when we find out what control we have over telemetry and updates.

Will Microsoft make it easier to dual boot with Linux?

Making people use MS accounts is a non-starter! That is BS! They are probably watching to see how much outcry there is...

Requiring MS Accounts won't fly in the enterprise world
 

meric

Posts: 320   +334
First time I'm not excited for a new Windows OS. Win10 could be a much better OS in every way, if it didn't have so much bloatware and mandatory updates. An OS should evolve into something lightweight with less fingerprint on hardware. I'm afraid 11 could be an even bigger bloatware.