• thearch@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    wants people to use windows 11 make it difficult to use windows 11 people find ways to use windows 11 anyway (what you wanted in the first place) punish them for using windows 11

    ???

    • TwanHE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      People that are running a windows modified to disable the hardware eligibility checks are probably also disabling/deleting the telemetry and activation checks.

      Microsoft doesn’t want you to use windows 11, they want your money and data.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Which is why I dropped windows after 7 and went linux. Telemetry bullshit was odious in 10, but in 11 the spyware is basically one of the core functions/purposes.

        Its why they pushed Windows 11 for free. Cause its not the product, you are.

        Theres more money to be made in monetizing your daily using habits and selling them (and serving you tons of ads), than there is in making you pay 150-200 bucks for the new OS once.

        And that new direction and drive radically alters how they develop the OS, and how you, the user, may interact with it. Which is why Windows is on the path of becoming a walled garden experience, with strict controls for “Security” (I.E. to keep you from doing anything that might impede their harvesting of data)

    • Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Greed.

      Sure, they want you to run Win11, but chances are you’re already running it, or at least Win10, so there’s not much to gain there.

      By making higher requirements for Win11 than neccessary Microsoft makes a killing on Windows licences.

      OEMs have to pay Microsoft for keys. And for MS to make money off of keys, OEMs need to make more PCs. And how does MS force/incentivise them to do that? By 80% of the Win10 PCs incompatible with Win11.

      Oh, and also, now they get to push their Copilot key as well.

      Microsoft has a vested interest in PC sales not stagnating any more than they do, and sometimes it takes an artificial push to make that a reality.

  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    I mean, this was 100% predictable.

    And anyone who didnt think it would happen were willfully blind or just plain ignorant.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    So Microsoft wants to force everyone to ditch their perfectly good machines so they can make more money off of selling OEM licenses.

    I’m just waiting for Europe to sue their greedy asses for planned obsolescence.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I can’t tell you how many Apple devices I’ve had that have become unsupported over the years.

    • Lila_Uraraka@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      While I do agree that a lot of the PCs that are deemed not compatible is really stupid, there are people that are trying to use Windows 11 on devices that have no business running it, so this is partially to prevent their devices from getting infected with a virus or something

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Since when is having vulnerable hardware the business of the operating system? Sure, they’re allowed to do whatever they want, but it’s stupid. It’s your system. You should be able to try to run any software you want on it and the software shouldn’t care (unless it just literally can’t work, not a software check to make it not work).

        I’m on Linux only though, so I may be biased. I think I own my computer and you may not agree with that.

  • goldteeth@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Thank god, for a second there I thought they meant “cracking down on people dodging Windows 11 by intentionally disabling TPM,” like I’ve been doing. False alarm, carry on.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Uh, no.

      95 bad, 98 bad, 98SE good only compared to 98, XP actually decent, Vista only really bad because of the change in how drivers were handled and there not being a robust library of them because of it, 7 THE GOD KING OF WINDOWS OSes…The Best, The Pinnacle. The Peak. The Top of the bell curve, 8 was shit, 10 was more shit than 8, 11 is just spyware.

      • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you’re calling 95 bad i don’t think you spent a lot of time in 3.1. Resolving IRQ conflicts, configuring winsock.DLL, whatever the hell else. 95 had its issues, especially on the gaming side, but it was leaps and bounds better than what came before. Meanwhile 98SE was good enough to keep people, especially gamers, on it for a long time.

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I did, but I didnt feel it was necessary to go into an excruciatingly detailed list of all OS’s from now to all the way back to LEO I in my OS criticism, just to avoid some pissy OS ping pong of “You thought that was bad? You obviously never used (insert older OS here)!”

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Seriously. Windows 7 was the first genuinely stable OS from Microsoft.

          Everything before it required regular reformating. Granted, the frequency of the reformating less over time, but still required it. Like, Win95/98 required it like every 3 months, XP every 6 months to a year, just to avoid the bloat and slowing down and issues. Same with reboots, it didnt have to be rebooted every time you ran a program, either.

          Windows 7? My longest run between formats was like 4-5 years iirc, and that was due to hardware changes, not due to any performance or maintenance need. Ans for reboots? Only time that computer ever got rebooted is when a windows update demanded it, or when the power went out. Neither of which was particularly frequent.

          It was also slick, agile, easy to use. You didnt have to think about shit when you used windows 7, you just did shit.

          I’m not a fanboy, despite what this sounds like, but 7 was legitimately the best Windows OS, hell it wouldnt take much twisting for me to say it was the best Desktop OS, period. It was the first time ever that I was able to use the computer, and not have to stop and think “Well, I just finished running a heavy game, I need to reboot before I do something else” I just stopped one heavy task, gave the background processes a second to finish up, then went right to another heavy task without issue or concern.

          It also had a very good UI. But Windows always had the best UI, by comparison, in the market, cause they spent billions on developing it so that the most computer illiterate could pick it up and use it with 15 minutes of instruction.

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      No. They’re all bad, some are just worse than others. You’ve all just been stockholm syndromed into thinking better of the “less bad” ones.

      • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        W7 was fine. I cut the cord and went Linux before W10. It sucked for a year, and now I look at the trash they sell and everyone pays actual money for… And I laugh XD.

      • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Everything after w7, id agree. Windows 7 was actually legit. It ran fine on my amd athlon with 512MB ram. Ran dolphin back in the day too. Now after that it was all shite

        • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          No 7 sucked too. It just came off the back of Vista which was a real hot mess, so 7 appeared better.

          The thing is, Microsoft has always had an adversarial (or abusive) relationship with its customers, forcing things on them that most of them don’t want. Like active desktop and IE integration in Windows 9x, “activation” and Fisher Price UI in XP, bloated (for the time) Aero UI that required a 3D capable GPU in Vista, UAC in Vista, forced automatic updates in 7, abandoning the start menu in favor of that awful tile UI in 8.x, telemetry you can’t disable in 10, a start menu that acts more like an app store and advertising place in 10, forced TPM and Microsoft accounts in 11 … the list is endless. And then when they back down on one thing, people are like: “Hurray, the czar heard us! Windows is actually good now!” … forgetting all the other things they have been forced to swallow in the past.

    • NoFuckingWaynado@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I generally agree, but I feel like Windows 8.1 was a vast improvement on 8. It was really more like Windows 9 with a Windows 8 theme.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sure, it really isn’t hard to be better than Windows 8… That doesn’t make Windows 8.1 good, it just means it’s less bad than Windows 8.

  • hydroxycotton@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I installed Linux mint on my laptop the other day because of various sustained long term annoyances with Windows. Despite some minor hiccups it only took about 30 minutes. It’s been such a great experience so far.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve been on EndeavourOS (basically Arch… btw…) for about a year and a half now, and I absolutely love it. I will never use Windows by choice again.

  • SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is just Vista all over again. Calm down people. Go to Linux or church if you’re scared.

    • excral@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The difference is, that you could just continue using XP until Win7 was released or continue using Win7 until Win10 was released. Win10 will reach end of life next year and then the only supported Windows will be Windows 11. Vista or Win8 were never as forced as Win11 is now.

    • moe90@feddit.nlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      not really because Vista does not have strong hardware requirements. But, this one have

      • Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Today, sure.

        2005 was a different story, one the opposite of this one.

        While Vista didn’t have high specified requirements, it gobbled resources so updating from XP to Vista you’d have a noticable slowdown.

        Win11 is the opposite of that story. While modern PC models (as in 5-year-old when Win11 first came out) can run Win11 fine, Microsoft forces requirements which aren’t needed.

        Sure, while having a better TPM and newer processor is a good thing, making anything other than that ewaste (because windows runs 90+% of consumer PCs, with Apple being the majority of the 10%) definitely isn’t.

      • Pantsofmagic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Vista was absolutely the slowest thing imaginable. They reduced the requirements as part of a marketing campaign for “Vista-ready” PCs, but PCs that ran it “well” were few and far between. Even after 7 came out if you went back to Vista it was noticeably slower.

    • Halosheep@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      How does that make any sense? Does Microsoft get a cut of sales for component upgrades?

      • toddestan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Any new computer sold that has a copy of Windows preinstalled means Microsoft is getting a cut.

        • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Are they still doing that thing where OEMs pay licenses based on units sold regardless of OS? So even if you want Linux, they still have to pay for windows?

      • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        people can’t upgrade.

        people see their computer isn’t supported.

        people buy a new computer.

        oems license windows.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    If you’re using Windows 11 and not having a great time with it, there are ways to make the experience more pleasant. We’ve covered 14 tweaks to make Windows 11 better and how to remove Windows 11’s junk, which is a good start toward making an OS you enjoy.

    There’s another way…

    • IndiBrony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Imagine having to remove a bunch of shit just so you can use your OS. smh

      Luckily, there exists an OS which undermines extreme enshittification. Can’t remember the name, though …

    • fatalicus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Hey man, I think your keyboard is broken.

      Every single reply you have made in this thread is just the exact same thing.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I know. It’s noyy keyboard, it’s me.

        I’ve had 30 years of having to read one Microsoft bullshit article after another, and then watch people go like sheep and give more monies to Microsoft for their shit. I’m kinda done with that and if my replies are annoying to you, imagine me having to deal with that for 30 years already.

        The simple truth is that Linux works, is more reliable and more usable than windows… frankly, always had been. The biggest “ooohhh difficult!” part about it is that a few things work slightly different. Takes 5 minutes to understand and you go. Most people use windows with all its bullshit to do some word stuff and browse the internet. Guess what? You can do that too on Linux. Since 20 years ago already, that’s how long I’ve been on Linux desktop.

        Fuck Microsoft bullshit that always ALWAYS vuases problems

  • Brownian Motion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    If you must use Windows, download it legitimately from MS website. Use RUFUS to burn the ISO image to a USB. Remove the restrictions you hate.

    Dual boot a Linux variant, and move over apps at your leisure, until you are no longer Win OS dependent.

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I preferred to do Windows as a VM personally. Dual boot cost me a year before my Linux switch BC it was easier to boot Windows when I needed it. With VM I could do mostly Linux with maybe just vm to open a word doc if I needed it.

  • VitabytesDev@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Why though? This just means that Windows 11 will run on more devices? Why is so important for your device to have a TPM and Secure Boot enabled, and a supported processor? If I were Microsoft, I would put the requirements even lower or even removed them.

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      This is just my theory, but maybe they want to turn it all into android-levels of lockdown for even stricter DRM and such.

  • vortexal@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The thing that I don’t understand is that, if this is such a big problem for Microsoft, why not just remove the system requirements or at least make an alternative version of Windows 11 that, even if it lacks certain features, doesn’t have those requirements?

    Microsoft wants people to switch to Windows 11 but a majority stay with Windows 10 because their systems don’t have what’s required and they’re either not willing to use Linux or they can’t for what ever their reason is. Making Windows 11 more accessible to Windows 10 users would fix this problem for most users but they’re not for some reason. I know they’re Microsoft and Microsoft doesn’t care about their users but they’re seemingly willing to lose a significant portion of their users over something so insignificant, which is out of character for Microsoft.

    • myliltoehurts@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’d guess it’s corporate circlejerk - they probably made deals with hardware manufacturers who are annoyed people are not replacing their perfectly functional systems with new ones. Windows gets pre-installed on new systems, and in exchange windows requires new things forcing people to upgrade their old systems - or be locked out of the most popular OS in the world.

  • viking@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Is there a way to make my PC seemingly not support Windows 11 so the annoying update nags go away? I’ll never use that shit OS.