Microsoft tells Windows 11 Insider build users with unsupported PCs to reinstall Windows...

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 877   +1,637
I don't understand why people even want to install Windows 11, it's not like there are notable improvements.

Even though it wont be important at work just yet, I have to start getting familiar with for when that happens.
Guess it's cause it's "new", people can't resist new.
Some definetly do, others wont have a choice since it will come pre-installed on their new computers.
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 464   +362
I just do my usual thing - of course after the sky has fallen - wait 2 or 3 months - while bugs shaken out by early adopters - then install it.

I still don't how W10 was completely different - I hardly slowed down. I find it strange tech users complaining they have to relearn W10 - like I'm not a power user - only know a few control keys .
MS has 3 or 4 ways to do things.
TBF I have W10 prof . so think that is less affected . And my windows explorer is now sometimes a pain - as constant refresh on page if transferring files - means it throws me out of my say renaming a file
 

Darth Shiv

Posts: 2,202   +775
I foresee an endless war between M$ attempting to restrict and people bypassing them.
Been that way for 20 years. Corporations and driver signing is the future. The amount of lockdown we have now at corporate to be perfectly honest I was expecting a long time ago. Remote work has made them super serious about it. Certificates for everything now. Code signing. Disable USB storage entirely. Disable Print Spooler. SecureBoot with Bitlocker.

People who write off escalating security simply don't understand statistics, risk, surface area. This will be an endless fight to close holes of course. But that doesn't mean you don't close holes. That makes no sense.
 

Norsiiii

Posts: 73   +97
You are aware that RAM exists right? All the tech will result in is shorter load times, given load times are just the result of copying data into RAM (so you don't need to access the HDD nearly as much in game). There will be no measurable in-game performance impact.

Seriously, Direct Storage and it's Sony equivalent will improve performance little more than the Xbox One's cloud processing [which I called out as BS from the beginning].
Not really true.
a) The main purpose is that it will free up CPU resources by not having the CPU doing any work at all in processing calls to storage for what the GPU is trying to process, nor feeding all of that data back through the CPU in order to send it to the GPU in the first place, which should make a significant difference in anything that's particularly CPU bound, and
b) Most games these days don't do much of the whole 'loading screens to go into distinct areas/locations in the game' anymore, and haven't done so for many years. The loading of various graphic/environment assets out of storage and into VRAM is done on the fly as the player moves around. Giving systems the ability to do this I) much faster, and ii) with less system resources required, means that games can afford to massively beef up the quality and detail of those assets without encountering problems with being able to load them in fast enough.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
I foresee an endless war between M$ attempting to restrict and people bypassing them.
This is an easy thing to say, it's already begun.

I don't understand why people even want to install Windows 11, it's not like there are notable improvements.
So what you're saying, is that you haven't used 11 yet? Doesn't really instill us with confidence of your opinion. Exactly the opposite.

Win 8.1 bitches if your CPU is too new, and 8.1 isn't EOL until 2023. Win 11 bitches if your CPU is too old. MS really doesn't want people using Windows.
If I had to guess I'd say they're schizophrenic.

TPM has little to do with your security. It has everything to do with access to your computer.
Truth!

Think for yourself.
Bold statement coming after you finished everything else you said. It's difficult to take you seriously when you contradict yourself.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
This will be an endless fight to close holes of course. But that doesn't mean you don't close holes. That makes no sense.
No, it means that corps need to learn how to close them WITHOUT infringing on the freedoms and rights of the citizen.
What they have been and are trying to do is unacceptable.
 
Last edited:

Nobina

Posts: 3,284   +3,358
So what you're saying, is that you haven't used 11 yet? Doesn't really instill us with confidence of your opinion. Exactly the opposite.
I used Windows 11, does my opinion instill you with confidence now?
 

Darth Shiv

Posts: 2,202   +775
No, it means that corps need to learn how to close them WITHOUT infringing on the freedoms and rights of the citizen.
What they have been and are trying to do is unacceptable.
What rights are you losing exactly?
 

mAdmAnDingo

Posts: 85   +75
That's a great theory that doesnt hold up at all. Intel has chosen to support some kaby lake CPUs, msotly mobile and HDET parts. The desktop parts and a majority of the laptop parts are left to rot. These use the same CPU cores as the approved models.

Similarly, zen and zen + are the same core, zen + has numerous tweaks for both stability and pereformance, particularly in the memory controller. However the core design is largely identical. And the most recent meltdown-esq vulnerability affected both zen + and zen 2, supported models, but not the unsupported zen 1.

It should be noted that not only does linux run ona ll this (and much older) hardware, but manages to do so while consuming fewer system resources and allowing for the same type of encryption without all these restrictions. MS isnt doing this to simply its codebase, as W11 is nearly identical to 10. It's doing this to drive hardware sales, which means more OEM $$$ for windows licenses.
But Zen1 and older Intel CPUs don't have hardware support for HVCI (Hypervisor-Protected Code Integrity), so they could possibly run much slower with it enabled compared to Zen2 and newer Intel CPUs that do include it by default (Zen2 is the first AMD CPU to have hardware support for HVCI). It is an optional setting in Win10, it is called "memory integrity" in "Windows Defender" "Core Isolation settings", but it is now compulsory in all Win11 installations.

I remember reading a number of articles and posts about it a few years ago already (which is when I first found out about it), with many users of Zen1 and older Intel CPUs complaining about a sometimes significant performance hit with HVCI enabled when it was first introduced to Win10 at that time, and that was also when I found out about the at the time upcoming Zen2 being AMDs first CPU to feature hardware support for it (and also more recent Intel CPUs).

But how much it would affect the average older PC I just don't know though, maybe the performance impact would be noticeable for some users, or maybe not, I honestly have no idea, so I cant say how it would or would not affect the majority of older PC hardware out there currently, because I honestly don't know.

But now Microsoft has made HVCI compulsory for all Win11 installations, so that likely has something to do with Win11 CPU requirements, as it matches with the CPU gens that have full HVCI hardware support, so it seems MS just doesn't want to deal with any possible performance issues on older platforms (rather than let users just disable HVCI, which would allow older PCs to run without possible performance issues, same as Win10).

My PC's are all Zen2 and Zen3, but I have never run any Win10 benchmarks with "Memory Integrity/HVCI" enabled/disabled myself, and I always have it disabled as well. So I cant speak of it's potential performance impact personally, only what I have read about online, but I would like the option of disabling it in Win11, so I could continue to disable it myself (even though I have Zen2/Zen3 CPUs with HVCI hardware support).

The real question is why MS doesn't just allow all users, regardless of whether they have older or newer hardware, the option to enable/disable HVCI (like we can in Win10), because surely they can decide for themselves how secure they want there own PC's to be? But it seems MS is more concerned with dictating everyone's security (TPM/HVCI) across the broader ecosystem, so I think that is the real debate.

Should MS be allowed to dictate to every user how secure their PC's should be, even if it makes their hardware incapable of supporting newer OS versions? And what about the potential HVCI performance impact, is there still an impact even on newer CPUs that feature hardware support, slight or otherwise? I would like the option of deciding how performant my PC shall be, even if it means less security by disabling HVCI, and I am sure older platform owners would like the option as well. I personally am all for user choice and letting them decide for themselves, but that is just my own opinion.
 
Last edited:

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,375   +4,686
Should MS be allowed to dictate to every user how secure their PC's should be, even if it makes their hardware incapable of supporting newer OS versions? And what about the potential HVCI performance impact, is there still an impact even on newer CPUs that feature hardware support, slight or otherwise? I would like the option of deciding how performant my PC shall be, even if it means less security by disabling HVCI. I personally am all for user choice and letting them decide for themselves, but that is just my own opinion.
From my perspective, M$ has been crippling Windohs performance for a long, long, time by including :poop: that I'll call cutsie animations, and just plain dumb performance "improvements." An example of the former is the "files flying from folder to folder" animation while copying files from one directory to another in the UI. An example of the latter is compiling an index file of the file system that supposedly improves searching the file system but totally kills performance in general when that indexing process is running - which seems to be most of the time. Those, are, of course, my opinions, but WTF? In DOS, you could do a "dir /s somefile" from a command prompt and find "somefile" in seconds compared to the current Windohs file search in File Explorer. The only way around that is to scour the web for a better performing Windohs File search that should be built-in, IMO.

This, and the newer CPU requirements, makes me think that the current line of thinking in M$ on Windohs development is along the lines of "there is so much CPU power available, we can make all kinds of cutsie stuff and users will love those cutsie things" and if the cutsie things kill performance, we can just require newer, better performing CPUs." :facepalm:

IMO, M$ is constantly "improving" Windohs from their perspective; however, it seems like they make those "improvements" without any feedback from REAL users - instead relying on coding "geniuses" that think they know what works in the real world when they have no clue. :rolleyes:
 

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
There is absolutely no one on this planet that would know that.
Seems clear you didn't think about that comment before you stated it.

For starters M$ would! Then there are the Windows Insider forums and plenty of Reddit threads where users have been trying out 11 and are raving about it. Then there are the forums at AnandTech, TechPowerUp, Toms Hardware where all three have dedicated threads for 11. There's but a few examples of people who would know. You can bet your life those aren't the only places were people are trying and raving about 11. I visit many of them. The only stand out complaints being made are about the retarded requirements and completely artificial limitations. Everything else like the UI, improvements to how it runs and even expanded and refined backward compatibility, people are almost gushing about it. So when I say that Mr "Nobina" is in the very small minority of people who don't like 11, it's because that is what I've observed, all over the internet. Granted, my experiences are not all-inclusive, but I get around enough to be able to safely state that what I've observed is a solid representation of the whole.

You want to argue with that? Go ahead. But I doubt many people(if any) will take you seriously after having made the above comment.. Your move..
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,284   +3,358
Seems clear you didn't think about that comment before you stated it.

For starters M$ would! Then there are the Windows Insider forums and plenty of Reddit threads where users have been trying out 11 and are raving about it. Then there are the forums at AnandTech, TechPowerUp, Toms Hardware where all three have dedicated threads for 11. There's but a few examples of people who would know. You can bet your life those aren't the only places were people are trying and raving about 11. I visit many of them. The only stand out complaints being made are about the retarded requirements and completely artificial limitations. Everything else like the UI, improvements to how it runs and even expanded and refined backward compatibility, people are almost gushing about it. So when I say that Mr "Nobina" is in the very small minority of people who don't like 11, it's because that is what I've observed, all over the internet. Granted, my experiences are not all-inclusive, but I get around enough to be able to safely state that what I've observed is a solid representation of the whole.

You want to argue with that? Go ahead. But I doubt many people(if any) will take you seriously after having made the above comment.. Your move..
Might as well go to Nvidia subreddit and conclude people like Nvidia products.

I don't dislike Windows 11 overall, I didn't say I dislike it, in the post you quoted I said I don't get why people would jump on it when there aren't any big differences, not the same thing.

There are things I don't like about it which don't mean I don't like the overall product, like:
-Sacrificing functionality for "muh minimalism", for example, renaming is hidden behind "show more options", small thing but it shows the direction they're heading in other areas too
-Slightly worse gaming performance I noticed in some benchmarks
-More aggressive pushing Edge and using a Microsoft account, which leads to even less privacy
-Can't ungroup taskbar buttons anymore like in W10
-Delay on every click for "muh animation"
-Worst of all, people raved about W10 lack of privacy and update control and they didn't bat an eye
-As you said "retarded requirements and completely artificial limitations" forcing many unfortunate people to upgrade just for an OS

Yet my opinion is to be discarded because it doesn't align with the majority, right?
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,927   +6,256
For starters M$ would!
And for starters you are wrong. MS doesn't know anything about their user-base. The only people they can say that for are the people they live with. And that is no where near even 1%, much less that high *** number you spit out.

Oh and by the way. When you ask gamers what they think of games. You will likely get a positive response. When you ask non-gamers you will likely get a less than positive response. Every bit of your response was based on people who were actively seeking the next version of Windows. It doesn't surprise me it was overwhelmingly positive. You try again. Your numbers were massively skewed and nowhere near discrediting my comment.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 602   +374
I don't dislike Windows 11 overall, I didn't say I dislike it, in the post you quoted I said I don't get why people would jump on it when there aren't any big differences, not the same thing.
That's not what you said earlier:
I don't understand why people even want to install Windows 11, it's not like there are notable improvements.
That is what you said and what I took aim at.

But let's take your points to task, shall we?
-Sacrificing functionality for "muh minimalism", for example, renaming is hidden behind "show more options", small thing but it shows the direction they're heading in other areas too
For people who use the right-click menu a lot, that can be annoying. I agree with you on that one. M$ has made no secret that they want to make Windows more efficient and ease to use. That's not a bad thing. But they're also bringing back a lot of the fined grained controls a lot of us have been complaining were missing or difficult to get at.
Slightly worse gaming performance I noticed in some benchmarks
Slightly? Like 1% or are we talking about more? Either way, we're still talking about a BETA OS. That complaint isn't a great point as they're not finished refining the release OS just yet.
More aggressive pushing Edge
Are we talking about the file-type associations thing? That's a part of the fine-grained controls they're bringing back. That is a GOOD thing. It gives YOU the direct control to define which app opens what. Learn to use it and you'll love it.
using a Microsoft account, which leads to even less privacy
Buy the Pro version of Windows 11(or use a workaround) and that goes bye-bye. Though I'll agree, it's a really low-class snake like move.
Can't ungroup taskbar buttons anymore like in W10
That is definitely a thing most users don't do. I've seen anyone actually use that setting. I'm not saying you're wrong, it could be useful given a certain situation.
Delay on every click for "muh animation"
Beta OS problem, one that was solved with the 2000.168 release.
Worst of all, people raved about W10 lack of privacy and update control and they didn't bat an eye
Not sure what your point is here.
As you said "retarded requirements and completely artificial limitations" forcing many unfortunate people to upgrade just for an OS
Fully agree with you there. But that is not a refection of the OS experience, rather lame-brained limitations which are easily defeated before and during setup.
Yet my opinion is to be discarded because it doesn't align with the majority, right?
I didn't say that, but it seems clear that how you read it.

And for starters you are wrong. MS doesn't know anything about their user-base.
Are you sure? Perhaps you're forgetting about the feedback app? I think you've forgotten about it. Still think M$ doesn't know anything?
Oh and by the way. When you ask gamers what they think of games. You will likely get a positive response.
Clearly you've frequented gaming forums, because that is so NOT what happens.
nowhere near discrediting my comment.
No, you did that yourself.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,284   +3,358
That's not what you said earlier:

That is what you said and what I took aim at.
It's the same thing I just phrased it differently cause it seems you misinterpreted the post you "took aim" at. There aren't any major improvements in W11 over W10 that >>I<< consider useful enough to warrant an upgrade of any kind. That should be clear enough now. On other points it seems you mostly agree or don't think it's a big deal which is fine. I also understand it is early phase yet from my experience release is usually not different from BETA.
Not sure what your point is here.
People, including me, wanted more control over Windows 10 updates and more privacy from Microsoft cause W10 is like spyware. It would be reasonable to expect they will deliver that in the next iteration of Windows, just at that time, there was no mention of W11. Now that W11 is a thing, seems they did **** all about it.