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

BobHome

Posts: 113   +47
They now demand TPM to be present and enabled. I did some checking and anything from the last couple years from AMD and intel have it on the chipset level, but turning it on will mean it will break dual booting for Linux for a while and make things overall difficult.
None of my PCs have TPM, but they have a 20-pin connector to plug a module into. Yeah, they're 7-10 years old and run great for my uses.
A quick look found different 20-pin pinouts, plus modules with 13, 14 pins. Looking at maybe $40-$69 min cost--but can you trust them? (pun intended)
 

Loadedaxe

Posts: 50   +73
No, it's time to make noise and tell Microsoft where to shove this inappropriate BS.


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.


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!
No offense, but people will have no choice but to tolerate it. One secureboot is not required, I dont know where that came in.

MS is basically doing what macOS has done. Security is becoming more of what users want, minus a handful wearing tin foil hats. W11 will run on most hardware dating back to Skylake, for those who dont have a system built in the last 7-8 years, W10 will still have updates until 2025, by then most users will be on newer systems, except the hold outs. Kinda like the W7 fans that just cant seem to move on, and that is fine and dandy. To each his own.
 

NoLifeDGenerate

Posts: 29   +16
No offense, but people will have no choice but to tolerate it. One secureboot is not required, I dont know where that came in.

MS is basically doing what macOS has done. Security is becoming more of what users want, minus a handful wearing tin foil hats. W11 will run on most hardware dating back to Skylake, for those who dont have a system built in the last 7-8 years, W10 will still have updates until 2025, by then most users will be on newer systems, except the hold outs. Kinda like the W7 fans that just cant seem to move on, and that is fine and dandy. To each his own.

No reason to move on. There was nothing wrong with 7. I had a Win7 install last 10 years. Outlived the hardware. As much as I loved XP, it never did that. Even linux distros don't last that long because of bullshit dependencies making it impossible to use newer versions of simple things like web browsers.

Personally, I refuse to be told I have to install the newest everything for something else to work that should have nothing to do with it. Software used to be more self contained. Last I heard, games on the Windows Store stop working if you try to avoid updating Win10. It's ridiculous. Some of us still believe "if it aint broke, don't fix it." These companies release buggy updates that break things all the time nowadays. If it's working fine for me, I refuse to update.
 

arrowflash

Posts: 460   +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.

Yes, Microsoft was very adamant that Windows 10 would be the last version of Windows. It was supposed to last forever and support new technologies and new hardware through the next few decades, only with the bi-annual updates.

The public and the media really should be pressing Microsoft to explain themselves about this backpedaling. Even if they obviously would make up a well crafted excuse with spins that would make them look good, it's a matter of principles, just pretending you never said anything is unethical. I'm really disappointed with the short memories of the public and the spinelessness of the media.
 

quadibloc

Posts: 307   +194
Since Windows 11 will require Secure Boot to be turned on, isn't it about time for some Windows 11 will kill Linux hysteria? Sure, Microsoft signed some Linux distros, and those that weren't signed could still be used, because you could turn Secure Boot off. But now, with most machines having Windows installed, suddenly Microsoft will have absolute control over which Linux distros will work on most machines.
All right, so hysteria is never a good idea. But a certain degree of concern does seem to be warranted.
 

quadibloc

Posts: 307   +194
Yes, Microsoft was very adamant that Windows 10 would be the last version of Windows. It was supposed to last forever and support new technologies and new hardware through the next few decades, only with the bi-annual updates.

The public and the media really should be pressing Microsoft to explain themselves about this backpedaling.

But since Windows 11 is a free upgrade, isn't this really just a name change, and not a substantive departure from their original statement?
 

quadibloc

Posts: 307   +194
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.
That's not quite fair.
Yes, it prevents the user from installing any Linux distro that Microsoft has not signed.
But it also prevents viruses from installlng themselves as the first thing the computer boots into. That is its legitimate purpose, and without that purpose, it would not have been allowed to exist.
 

Geralt

Posts: 563   +789
No reason to move on. There was nothing wrong with 7. I had a Win7 install last 10 years. Outlived the hardware. As much as I loved XP, it never did that. Even linux distros don't last that long because of bullshit dependencies making it impossible to use newer versions of simple things like web browsers.

Personally, I refuse to be told I have to install the newest everything for something else to work that should have nothing to do with it. Software used to be more self contained. Last I heard, games on the Windows Store stop working if you try to avoid updating Win10. It's ridiculous. Some of us still believe "if it aint broke, don't fix it." These companies release buggy updates that break things all the time nowadays. If it's working fine for me, I refuse to update.
Windows 3.1 is good for me. I, like you, don't see the need to update.
 

Geralt

Posts: 563   +789
Since Windows 11 will require Secure Boot to be turned on, isn't it about time for some Windows 11 will kill Linux hysteria? Sure, Microsoft signed some Linux distros, and those that weren't signed could still be used, because you could turn Secure Boot off. But now, with most machines having Windows installed, suddenly Microsoft will have absolute control over which Linux distros will work on most machines.
All right, so hysteria is never a good idea. But a certain degree of concern does seem to be warranted.
Nope, secure boot On is not required.
 

Bullwinkle M

Posts: 551   +439
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...

Muh fast boot?

A fresh copy of Windows XP boots in 3 seconds flat on my ancient Nehalem

5 times faster than Windows 10
 

arrowflash

Posts: 460   +498
But since Windows 11 is a free upgrade, isn't this really just a name change, and not a substantive departure from their original statement?
It is just a name change, since Windows 11 for all practical purposes is Windows 10.1.

But it IS a complete departure from their original statement. They said "Windows 10", not "the Windows 10 kernel" or "the Windows 10 codebase". They basically said "Windows 10 will be the last version number of Windows". Obviously a hypothetical Windows 10 50H1 would be a very different OS than we know today, but the important thing (based on their original statement) is that it would still be called Windows 10.

I'd really love to see everyone calling MS out for their backpedaling bs. Shows you can't trust anything they say for the long term.

That's not quite fair.
Yes, it prevents the user from installing any Linux distro that Microsoft has not signed.
But it also prevents viruses from installlng themselves as the first thing the computer boots into. That is its legitimate purpose, and without that purpose, it would not have been allowed to exist.

I've never even heard of boot viruses since the MS-DOS days. I worked in IT support all across the 2000s and a good part of 2010s, had the displeasure of handling lots of virus petri dish machines, and never saw any machine infected with a boot virus. So that's a pretty weak excuse for Secure Boot if that's the case. Plus, plenty of non-UEFI PCs with old AT-style BIOS already had a "boot virus protection" option (though I'm not sure how effective they are, but I've heard of it causing problems for installing certain OSes or other disk tasks, so they are probably effective).

Muh fast boot?

A fresh copy of Windows XP boots in 3 seconds flat on my ancient Nehalem

5 times faster than Windows 10

 

Bullwinkle M

Posts: 551   +439
Only 8th gen and up? That's insane. Have they made up any excuse for this?

It's for your own good!

You should ALWAYS blindly trust Microsoft!

As you can see here, you're security is FAR too important to be left to the End User >

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...gning-rootkit-malware-in-supply-chain-fiasco/
or
or

MICROSOFT
Where would YOU like to go today?
 
Last edited:

Nobina

Posts: 3,291   +3,369
So why would I even upgrade to Windows 11, what do I gain? It's just a bunch of silly **** they are adding, nothing of real importance.
 

John J Miller

Posts: 11   +3
At 65 years old I don’t see myself upgrading my computer again for the last time. Microsoft and it’s infinite wisdom has cut my E5 1620 Xeon processor out of the list. So I think they know where they can stick Windows 11
 

ChrisH1

Posts: 166   +75
You can still get around it in the leaked version although they push it harder than ever. Hopefully Microsoft will stop trying to be Google, otherwise a lot of folks will never upgrade. Heck, I just returned a TV because it wouldn't let me use wifi without signing up for Roku, which meant providing an email and credit card info. A growing number of consumers are utterly fed up with this garbage.
I think a lot of this stuff is getting legislation forbidding it. Europe is going the way of saying ‘no pre-installed software you can’t delete’. In the meantime, passive-aggressive compliance is the way to go, it’s easy to get an email addy you never use (even easier if you have your own domain), and a once-off credit card number with $0 in it.
 

NoLifeDGenerate

Posts: 29   +16
I think a lot of this stuff is getting legislation forbidding it. Europe is going the way of saying ‘no pre-installed software you can’t delete’. In the meantime, passive-aggressive compliance is the way to go, it’s easy to get an email addy you never use (even easier if you have your own domain), and a once-off credit card number with $0 in it.

MS never learns though. Didn't they already get sued for bundling IE with Windows back in the day? Yet, I can't delete that Edge **** from my Xbox.
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,936   +6,264
At 65 years old I don’t see myself upgrading my computer again for the last time. Microsoft and it’s infinite wisdom has cut my E5 1620 Xeon processor out of the list. So I think they know where they can stick Windows 11
That is the way I feel and I'm 15 younger than you.
 

McMurdeR

Posts: 330   +329
Apple and Google update their OSs. World is ambivalent.

MS updates Windows. An army of 200,000 geeks emerge from the 1990's and howl with rage. World is ambivalent.
 

Loadedaxe

Posts: 50   +73
Apple and Google update their OSs. World is ambivalent.

MS updates Windows. An army of 200,000 geeks emerge from the 1990's and howl with rage. World is ambivalent.
IKR, MS gives everyone a free shiny new OS and everyone freaks the hell out because they may have to update their bios or buy a $30 module. And here's the funny part. They say "Oh FFS MS, screw you I wont get Windows 11, I'm sticking with 10" like MS cares