Researchers warn that Windows 11 restrictions could send 240 million computers to landfills

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,181   +1,427
Staff member
In a nutshell: Researchers warn that up to 240 million PCs could wind up in landfills after Microsoft ends support for Windows 10. The rationale here is that Windows 11 hardware restrictions will render all of these computers obsolete. However, older computers have been going obsolete for decades, and current recycling efforts are much more robust than in past years. So, will it be a real problem?

Windows 11's strict hardware requirements have received their fair share of controversy since launching in late 2021. Initially, Microsoft warned of compatibility issues, which didn't go over too well, and saw users finding ways around the hardware checks. It's raising further concerns as Windows 10 approaches end-of-life (EOL) status.

Technology research firm Canalys reports that when Microsoft sunsets Windows 10 in 2025, it could send as many as 240 million PCs to the scrap heap. Reuters estimates the dump would equate to 480 million kilograms of e-waste. For perspective, it adds that such a dump is equivalent to about 320,000 automobiles.

"Microsoft's decision will worsen the industry's e-waste problem and highlights the role of OS vendors in enabling circular IT models," notes Canalys. "Microsoft's Windows 11 will help support a struggling PC market as customers prepare for another refresh cycle – but the termination of Windows 10 support could prevent hundreds of millions of devices from getting second lives, leaving many liable to end up in landfill [sic]."

However, the entirety of 240 million computers will not likely land in garbage dumps in 2025.

Microsoft has already announced it will offer extended security updates for Windows 10 to 2028. Of course, continuing EOL coverage is neither free nor cheap. Only a fraction of customers with obsolete PCs, primarily businesses, will shell out for it. Microsoft also stands to gain from the refreshed demand for Windows 11 that Win10's sunsetting brings.

Then there is Linux and repurposing to consider. A small to moderate number of Windows 10 machines will see new life as Linux computers and servers. Others will continue running Win10 for functions like testing and research. Air gapped networks reduce the need for new security updates and allow Windows 10 to remain viable indefinitely.

Additionally, many – maybe even most – users will recycle their e-waste. Even some of the smallest communities have e-waste drives at least once per year. Others have full-time recycling centers devoted to scrapping and reclaiming components and rare-earth elements from discarded PCs and other electronics, which helps with the ongoing shortages of these manufacturing resources.

Hard drives and other components provide materials manufacturers can use in EV production or power generation structures, like windmills.

"Turning end-of-life computers into the magnets that power sustainable technologies like electric vehicles and wind turbines will help meet the rising global demand for electricity," Noveon Magnetics Chief Commercial Officer Peter Afiuny told Reuters.

Recyclers can also reclaim metals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and copper from the batteries inside discarded computers to make more batteries for new electronics. Other materials like aluminum and plastics can be recycled for use in various other products.

While 240 million is a considerable number of obsolete computers, only a fraction will end up in landfills after Win10 enters EOL status on October 14, 2025, as Canalys worries. Modern e-waste recycling and repurposing should take care of most of the projected waste going to landfills.

Image credit: Paul Schultz

Permalink to story.

 
Looking forward to the day when somebody renders Microsoft obsolete. They have been leaching on the entire computer industry for 30 years now, and their contribution has been dubious at best.
Oh yeah? Please bring up some better alternatives, and also an explanation as to what prevents people from switching en masse!

Claiming that "only" 10 years of *free* support for Windows 10 is unacceptable is just mindbogglingly ridiculous. The last computer that will be unable to run Windows 11 will be sg like 8 years old by 2025 when Win10 will be EOL'd.

What makes you feel entitled to the latest OS on ancient hardware? I really don't understand. Can you install the latest Android on 10 years old phones? Or the latest iOS, for that matter? Or the latest anything, on anything, really?

Name ONE bleeding-edge OS that runs great on decade-old hardware. Just one. Hint: Linux and macOS are not among them.

Then go further, and name just ONE OS that provides FREE updates for more than 10 years. Oh, you can't name one. Alright then. Then maybe keep your nonsense to yourself. Either enjoy your old OS on your old HW, or go whine somewhere else.
 
However, older computers have been going obsolete for decades
No. The number of devices Microsoft plans to obsolete en-masse on Win 10 patch shutoff day is unprecedented. This marks the first time Microsoft has declined to offer an upgrade path to a newer version of Windows to a very large number of devices still in active use.

However, I agree they're not all going to end up in landfills. A significant chunk will just continue to be used, and likely exploited soon after. Let's hope those aren't the ones operating say our power and water supplies.

 
me ONE bleed
Oh yeah? Please bring up some better alternatives, and also an explanation as to what prevents people from switching en masse!

Claiming that "only" 10 years of *free* support for Windows 10 is unacceptable is just mindbogglingly ridiculous. The last computer that will be unable to run Windows 11 will be sg like 8 years old by 2025 when Win10 will be EOL'd.

What makes you feel entitled to the latest OS on ancient hardware? I really don't understand. Can you install the latest Android on 10 years old phones? Or the latest iOS, for that matter? Or the latest anything, on anything, really?

Name ONE bleeding-edge OS that runs great on decade-old hardware. Just one. Hint: Linux and macOS are not among them.

Then go further, and name just ONE OS that provides FREE updates for more than 10 years. Oh, you can't name one. Alright then. Then maybe keep your nonsense to yourself. Either enjoy your old OS on your old HW, or go whine somewhere else.
I remember how years ago some developers came up with an independent distribution of Windows XP, in an attempt to extend its support to newer devices, and then Microsoft stepped in trying to put an end to it. That basically invalidates everything you said here.
 
Claiming that "only" 10 years of *free* support for Windows 10 is unacceptable is just mindbogglingly ridiculous....
Sorry, you're way off on this. Windows 11 would run just fine on these computers if Microsoft changed a few configuration parameters. Plenty of enthusiasts are already running Windows 11 on those computers. It is Microsoft who is going out of their way to create an artificial end-of-useful-life scenario.

To be clear this entirely about security patches. MS is under no obligation to offer new features to anyone. When they can create demand by making an improved product, that's fine. But when they are only doing it by cutting off fixes for defects that they created in the first place, and that they have anyway (because it's 99% the same code for Win 11), I think they are on shaky legal ground, at least in the US. We've had successful product liability lawsuits against products sold decades in the past.
 
Oh yeah? Please bring up some better alternatives, and also an explanation as to what prevents people from switching en masse!
Linux, macOS, chromeOS. What stops people from using them? The average person is a tech illiterate neanderthal that will only use what they are told to use by their fellow tech illiterate flock.

Claiming that "only" 10 years of *free* support for Windows 10 is unacceptable is just mindbogglingly ridiculous.
He never claimed that, YOU did. Classic strawman.

Also, wrong. Those updates were not free. They were paid for by your data, which was clawed at and sold, to the tune of thousands of dollars a year, to advertisers and various governments to "monitor" behavior. Or did you forget about PRISM?

The last computer that will be unable to run Windows 11 will be sg like 8 years old by 2025 when Win10 will be EOL'd. What makes you feel entitled to the latest OS on ancient hardware? I really don't understand. Can you install the latest Android on 10 years old phones? Or the latest iOS, for that matter? Or the latest anything, on anything, really?
Widnows 11 runs fine on 10+ year old hardware. We have LONG passed the point of "good enough" for casual or office use. Only those running demanding software like games or productivity/rendering suites need more.

And yes, you CAN run the newest android on 10 year old phones. You should check up on lineage OS. Just because corporations dont want to doesnt mean there is no technological reason old hardware cant function.

Why do you feel the need to meatshield one of the richest companies on earth? Why do you feel the need to protect terrible decisions that will result in millions of pounds of needless e waste? Especially from a company that virtue signals about how much they care about the environment.

Name ONE bleeding-edge OS that runs great on decade-old hardware. Just one. Hint: Linux and macOS are not among them.
Linux. It is among them, your ignorance is not an excuse. Oh, and mac OS does run great on decade old macs, as the community proved multiple times. The 2013 macbooks could easily run Big Sur, hardware wise.

Then go further, and name just ONE OS that provides FREE updates for more than 10 years. Oh, you can't name one. Alright then. Then maybe keep your nonsense to yourself. Either enjoy your old OS on your old HW, or go whine somewhere else.
Stop being such a hypocritical child. Microsoft isnt worth meatshielding. Throw away culture is one of the worst things to come from the 21st century and any and all efforts to maintain it should be admonished.
 
You could blame MS but is up to each one of us whether this happens or not. In my company, every non compatible computer with the domain rules is been used as spare parts or they are given to the field technicians so they can tinker with it (90% of our employees are tinkerers). Electronic waste is inevitable at the end, but at least we can try to stretch it as far as possible.
 
We have LONG passed the point of "good enough" for casual or office use.
I would disagree with you on that one. Have you ever tried to run modern versions of Windows on anything less than a 6th or 7th generation Intel chip? Have you tried Google Chrome? Firefox? On the same old hardware?

OK sure, I'll admit that it'll run; however, it'll run like hot crap. Especially so if you only have a quad core processor and not even God can help you if you only have a dual-core Core i3 or *shudder* a Pentium or a Celeron.

Why? Because both Firefox and Google Chrome spawns crap loads of sub-processes and threads that'll bog down anything that's got less than six CPU cores. Throw in an antimalware program, even Windows Defender, and dude... you're going to be in for a bad time.

Then lets take into account that many of those older systems run with less than 8 GBs of RAM and holy sh*t man, you're going to be pounding that page file hard due to high RAM usage. Hell, 16 GBs is not even enough by today's standards; it should be bare minimum. New systems still come with only 8 GBs. UGH!

Today's systems should really come with no less than 32 GBs of RAM due to how much of an absolute RAM pig that both Google Chrome and Firefox are these days. They will absolutely take every GB of RAM you have and smile about it too.
 
As long as many people need and use it, the operating system will exist and be updated without having to buy new components..
it's just that some of us always want to have the newest or best (operating) systems or components, just because we have a lot of money to spend or to keep up with the current trend..
 
Linux, macOS, chromeOS. What stops people from using them? The average person is a tech illiterate neanderthal that will only use what they are told to use by their fellow tech illiterate flock.

People dont seem to realize that Linux has been about as hard to use as windows XP for several years now. Which, I argue, makes it easier to use than windows 10 or 11 because they aren't constantly forcing updates on you, changing the location of settings or preventing you from changing things entirely.

Windows won't let you uninstall Edge but Linux will let you uninstall the bootloader. I will give them this, I like Edge way more than chrome and Bing search is way better than google. Valve is also dumping literal millions into developing Linux gaming support.
 
Windows won't let you uninstall Edge
In Europe, they're being forced to let you do that.

Yes, I do use Microsoft Edge but that's just me; I like it. So, to me it doesn't matter but for others, it might.
Valve is also dumping literal millions into developing Linux gaming support.
Eventually, it might get to where Linux will be able to fully supplant Windows but I doubt that'll be for at least another decade.
 
I would disagree with you on that one. Have you ever tried to run modern versions of Windows on anything less than a 6th or 7th generation Intel chip? Have you tried Google Chrome? Firefox? On the same old hardware?

OK sure, I'll admit that it'll run; however, it'll run like hot crap. Especially so if you only have a quad core processor and not even God can help you if you only have a dual-core Core i3 or *shudder* a Pentium or a Celeron.

Why? Because both Firefox and Google Chrome spawns crap loads of sub-processes and threads that'll bog down anything that's got less than six CPU cores. Throw in an antimalware program, even Windows Defender, and dude... you're going to be in for a bad time.

Then lets take into account that many of those older systems run with less than 8 GBs of RAM and holy sh*t man, you're going to be pounding that page file hard due to high RAM usage. Hell, 16 GBs is not even enough by today's standards; it should be bare minimum. New systems still come with only 8 GBs. UGH!

Today's systems should really come with no less than 32 GBs of RAM due to how much of an absolute RAM pig that both Google Chrome and Firefox are these days. They will absolutely take every GB of RAM you have and smile about it too.
Yes, I have run windows 11, the oldest system was a core 2 duo laptop with DDR2 RAM. That one chugged a bit. Anything nehalem and up (first gen Core I) has had no issues once they have a SSD and 16GB of RAM. Running chrome and firefox, streaming 1080p video, no issues checking facebook, ece.

16GB is plenty for most users. For casual web browsing 8GB still works fine. Especially if running something like linux that isnt as resource heavy, but IME windows 11 still functions perfectly fine so long as the system has an SSD. Anything that can run 10 will run 11, they are the same OS underneath, hence why we can strip all the silly requirements out and the installer proceeds just fine.

People dont seem to realize that Linux has been about as hard to use as windows XP for several years now. Which, I argue, makes it easier to use than windows 10 or 11 because they aren't constantly forcing updates on you, changing the location of settings or preventing you from changing things entirely.

Windows won't let you uninstall Edge but Linux will let you uninstall the bootloader. I will give them this, I like Edge way more than chrome and Bing search is way better than google. Valve is also dumping literal millions into developing Linux gaming support.
Edge has major memory system advantages too. Our chrome admin uses edge exclusively, because google chrome starts heaving if you try to manage the profiles of multiple chrome admins at once. Edge has no issues. Too bad MS is behind it.

Linux is so easy to use these days. Installing mint and spinning up firefox takes literally under 2 minutes on newer hardware. For casual users there is no reason to run windows anymore. On my gaming rig I've yet to find something in my library that wont run on linux, but then again I dont play CoD, so.....
 
Running chrome and firefox, streaming 1080p video, no issues checking facebook, ece.
I find that hard to believe knowing how much RAM both Firefox and Chrome likes to chow down on. I'm sitting here right now with more than twenty tabs open and Microsoft Edge is using more than 6 GBs of RAM.
 
Oh yeah? Please bring up some better alternatives, and also an explanation as to what prevents people from switching en masse!

Claiming that "only" 10 years of *free* support for Windows 10 is unacceptable is just mindbogglingly ridiculous. The last computer that will be unable to run Windows 11 will be sg like 8 years old by 2025 when Win10 will be EOL'd.

What makes you feel entitled to the latest OS on ancient hardware? I really don't understand. Can you install the latest Android on 10 years old phones? Or the latest iOS, for that matter? Or the latest anything, on anything, really?

Name ONE bleeding-edge OS that runs great on decade-old hardware. Just one. Hint: Linux and macOS are not among them.

Then go further, and name just ONE OS that provides FREE updates for more than 10 years. Oh, you can't name one. Alright then. Then maybe keep your nonsense to yourself. Either enjoy your old OS on your old HW, or go whine somewhere else.
I don’t know what you’re smoking, or why you’re shilling for a company that is known to spy on it’s users and is in bed with the CIA/NSA, but unless you’re running some really obscure, non web-based applications, there really is next to no good reason to use Windows… especially when Linux is so laughably easy to use these days. It’s also much easier on system resources, respects user privacy, and isn’t moving settings around all the damn time either.

Let’s talk compatibility.
It’s been my experience that Linux supports hardware a lot longer than Windows does. I’ve had computers that will not update beyond certain versions of W10 due to GPU driver incompatibility (Llano laptops anyone?) but ended up running Manjaro (yeah yeah I know) perfectly fine.

Even on the flip side, try installing a stock image of W11 on a *modern* laptop (mine has a 1240P for example) without a network connection during setup. First things first you better have the correct NVME/storage drivers available to load into Windows setup so that your drive is even detected. Big ouch. Talk about being user-friendly am I right? After that, when you manage to bypass the latest OOBE M$ account strong-arming by pressing F-whatever at a specific point of the OOBE followed by some obscure disarm/disable command which changes every release or two (which is also not user-friendly to have to do last I checked), you’ll STILL need to install additional drivers for NIC and GPU among other things. Not so with Linux. Kernel 6+ (which is included in virtually every distro release of the prior 12 months) and I’m good to go, no loading additional storage drivers at boot or network connection during setup required! It’s frankly shocking to see how incompatible the supposedly “compatible” Windows 11 was off a fresh install on my Intel laptop… with an Intel GPU… and an Intel WiFi module. So much for Windows compatibility!

And don’t even get me STARTED on wupdate. I guess I’ve been “spoiled” by literally every Linux distro I’ve used actually TELLING me exactly what components and software are being updated and installed instead of Microsoft’s usual “security update” and “Version Update” vagueries. Oh, and the fact that most software and OS components in Linux can be updated and managed from a single location? Chef’s kiss. Try doing that in Windows without using M$ terrible App Store, or clumsy winget cmdlet.
 
Last edited:
Name ONE bleeding-edge OS that runs great on decade-old hardware. Just one. Hint: Linux and macOS are not among them.

Windows 10 and bypassed Windows 11 both works great on decade old Haswell cpus.

I have an i7 4790k that came out basically 10 years ago and these Windows OS runs as smoothly on it as it does on my other Ryzen 5000 computer. I barely/cant even notice any difference in OS response times when comparing the two computers.
 
Eventually, it might get to where Linux will be able to fully supplant Windows but I doubt that'll be for at least another decade.
While it is a different process, getting games to work in Linux is no more difficult than installing missing DLLs was in XP, which is why I made that comparison. It has been my experience that the only real thing stopping games from running properly on Linux is modern DRMs. I would say that at worst we are a decade away from Linux being a total windows replacement and that within 5 years there will be very few compromises.

I admit that there is a learning curve but it isn't difficult to get over. Once you do, the process is near trival. I like to think I'm on the higher end of being technically inclined and it took me about a month to streamline the process. Which, in my opinion, is about how long it should take to become fluent with any peice of software. I'd say that those less technically inclined it would take about 3 months to become competent and less than 6 to become fluent.

I enjoyed the learning process as I thought of it as an intellectual exercise but I can also respect the opinion of people who want things to "just work." I don't mean that in the Todd Howard meaning of the phrase, either.

I started my Linux journey in 2017. I've been watching it get easier and easier every year since then. I know that some of that can be attributed to me getting better with Linux but I have noticed that getting things to work requires less effort from me over time.

The biggest problem I see with Linux is with the community itself. There are many Linux users who want it to be difficult to use as it inflates their egos. Those egotistical users don't make up an insignificant portion of that community, either. So for Linux to be practical for everyone it isn't anything inherent to the operating system itself but with the development community itself who want it to be difficult to use. Luckily with have projects like Linux Mint and PopOS. There is a growing part of the community, like me, who is so exhausted with modern Windows that we try to lower the barrier of entry for the average user.

Looking at the progress that's been made from 2017 to now I feel that in about 5 years anyone who can build a computer and install windows can start using Linux in days or weeks instead of months
 
Last edited:
My first thought on hearing a report like this, is who funded this research from Canalys?

Funding can greatly influence the framing of such research.
 
I've moved to Linux and that was much smoother process than I thought initially. I think it is best way to put those devices back to use. And best option to get some of the privacy back.
 
Blame everyone else but Microsoft. No good drivers from nVidia or AMD on Linux. Dolby Access or DTS Sound Unbound or Creative cards don't work on Linux. Linux has no Spatial Audio system like Windows does. Most games don't run natively on Linux. Most streaming sites think Linux users are pirates. Hardware utility programs don't support Linux. Even as big as Apple is, Mac OS is still esoteric.

I would gladly dump Windows, but I'd lose too much functionality or performance.
 
No matter what side you are on e-waste is a huge issue for everyone. The hardware should be able to run as long as possible until it either dies or just can't run modern software. These arbitrary OS checks to be able to run the latest doesn't do anybody any good (except MS, etc.). Most companies and consumers would prefer to run their hardware as long as possible and not be restricted by planned obsolescence in the name of security, which can be enhanced on every OS no matter how old. It's all about the money.
 
Back