Not Even the Ghost of Obsolescence Can Coerce Users Onto Windows 11 (theregister.com) 287
Windows 10 may be just shy of two years away from the ax, but its successor, Windows 11, appears to be as unpopular as ever. From a report: The end of Windows 10 support is getting closer. Unless the company blinks, October 14, 2025, will be the end of the line for the Home and Pro editions of the operating system, yet users seem reluctant to move on to Windows 11. There was a marked reluctance by users to move from Windows 7, back in the day, but some of the reasons for hesitancy this time are different. The move to Windows 10 usually required the purchase of new hardware. It tended to be unavoidable -- 7 could run on far lower-spec devices than later versions. The move from Windows 10 to Windows 11 will also require new hardware, but for different reasons.
Infamously, Microsoft axed support for a raft of hardware with Windows 11, including older Intel CPUs, on security grounds. The result was that hardware that will run Windows 10 perfectly well will not accept the new operating system. And this is not due to performance problems (who remembers trying to run Vista on XP hardware?) but rather because of Microsoft's edict. The result? A collective shrug from PC users. Windows 10 does the job. Why upgrade? The figures speak for themselves. Windows 10 dominates the desktop. According to Statcounter, the worldwide Windows version desktop market share puts Windows 10 at 71.64 percent, with Windows 11 trailing at 23.61 percent.
Infamously, Microsoft axed support for a raft of hardware with Windows 11, including older Intel CPUs, on security grounds. The result was that hardware that will run Windows 10 perfectly well will not accept the new operating system. And this is not due to performance problems (who remembers trying to run Vista on XP hardware?) but rather because of Microsoft's edict. The result? A collective shrug from PC users. Windows 10 does the job. Why upgrade? The figures speak for themselves. Windows 10 dominates the desktop. According to Statcounter, the worldwide Windows version desktop market share puts Windows 10 at 71.64 percent, with Windows 11 trailing at 23.61 percent.
Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:5, Interesting)
Straight from the "Windows Update" window in Windows 10:
Re: (Score:2)
Are these things users consider features or only Microsoft?
Re:Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 11, for most users has nothing of value, if you have to harass users to get your FREE update, then it says a lot about your product. In a free market the price people are willing to pay sets the value of a product if that is zero, it says what the value is. The main value to me of me getting windows 11 is it will stop nagging me to get windows 11. But I am not fooled it will just start nagging me about the next feature Microsoft things I need and I don't want.
The features I see in windows is it is simply becoming more of an advertising platform than an operating system. Oh yes and moving buttons around the screens because some useless, overpriced UX expert thinks they need to be moved, just leave them be the only thing you are adding is me having to learn the new locations. My analogy is an electrician coming around and offering to move all the locations of your light switches for fee every couple of year, you would have to pay me a significant amount of money to do that.
Just recently teams keeps suggesting that I install it on all my devices, my answer to that is HELL NO, I don't want every random message somebody sends to me at work to demand my attention. But do they give me an option to say no I never want this, nope it just seems to keep giving me that "helpful" suggestion each time. But Microsoft are so arrogant that they don't even consider I don't want their "feature", to me it has negative value. If work doubled my salary to install this I still wouldn't it would consume my life. Just like I don't want a Microsoft account, the answer is no, I meant no, I don't mean ask me again later, I should be able to charge for my wasted time working around not getting one.
Re:Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I installed Windows 11 pretty much as soon as it was available for my system. After a few months, I switched full-time to Linux (Kubuntu this time; I used Mint before but wanted to try a KDE based system).
Windows 11 was annoying enough that I abandoned the platform. And the software I'd bought there (Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer are excellent!). I spend my free time playing video games and figuring out how to make them... and it's now less annoying for me to do this on Linux. All the things I need a
Re:Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:4, Insightful)
Unsure if this is a trend in all software, but gone are the days of "yes/no" and now it's "yes/maybe later" and that's arrogant to assume I'll change my mind "later".
I won't, stop asking.
Re: Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:4, Interesting)
Yep, windows 11 at work keeps asking me to back up my data in their cloud. Well, it's almost entirely PII so that would be bad mmkay? But Microsoft still keeps showing me the ad and won't let me tell them to shove it permanently, only put it off.
Re:Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not even MS thinks it's ready (Score:5, Insightful)
If Microsoft really wanted to force users to upgrade to Windows 11, they just need to drop support for Windows 10 in their next version of Office products.
Most businesses are addicted to their Office 365 subscriptions at this point, and they'll upgrade when they're forced to so. They won't like it, but it's still easier than migrating to a different operating system or office platform.
Re: (Score:3)
If Microsoft really wanted to force users to upgrade to Windows 11, they just need to drop support for Windows 10 in their next version of Office products.
Most businesses are addicted to their Office 365 subscriptions at this point, and they'll upgrade when they're forced to so. They won't like it, but it's still easier than migrating to a different operating system or office platform.
Good! It's one of those things yaknow. Take the maximum amount of Bullshit that Windows users will put up with, and that's the minimum level of Bullshit that Microsoft will hand you. But fear not - they'll try to increase that little by little
So much stasis, so much inertial fear of moving on to something better - and make no mistake Microsoft is not better than the alternatives.
And when Microsoft turns into a subscription only plan, they will pay whatever Microsoft say they will pay. And brag about i
Re: (Score:3)
On the positive side, I've now posted 3 times instead of one.
No, really... (Score:5, Funny)
For realsies this time!
I swear!
Re: (Score:2)
The 7 -> 10 path got me to pay more attention to linux and I now run it on some of my machines. This has led me to realize that very little of what I do actually requires Windows. So yeah, when push comes to shove I'll probably just move to linux.
OTOH (for compatibility with obscure apps) I do still have a couple of boxen running XP and one with W98, so nothing is every really over, is it?
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty much. I skipped Vista and 8. 7 and 10 were good. 11 doesn't offer anything significant but does make some things worse, so I figure I'll make my next upgrade when 12 comes out. Likely to 12, but I suppose it's possible 12 could be worse and 11 will be the least bad option that still receives support.
Not eligible to upgrade (Score:4, Insightful)
And I'm not switching computer anytime soon.
Re: (Score:3)
I can relate. The best system for me was XP. It did the job and was like an Evinrude or a Timex.
I had a bunch at the house when the firm upgraded and I ran them into the ground. Even after they were deprecated, I used a familiar hack to make them look like legacy embedded versions and Microsoft continued to provide security updates on the grounds that my stuff might be an ATM or gas pump.
Windows 10 and 11 are more complex and need more babysitting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not eligible to upgrade (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly this.
My perfectly capable machine (for the stuff I am doing, and it's a lot of various stuff) can't upgrade because of that stupid TPM thingie.
Yes, I know there are ways around it, and no, I don't care enough to implement that workaround.
Re: (Score:2)
the hardware is the issue (Score:5, Interesting)
Its not even a performance vs edict thing its a you don't need a new PC thing. Unless you are a gamer there is really nothing performance wise a lot of home users are going to get over 2017 era pc.
Will it browse the web better - nope not really
will it run office better - nope not really
will it run your personal finance app better - nope not really
will it run zoom/teams/etc better - nope not really
will watch youtube/netflix/etc better - nope not really
Now maybe some generative AI tools will change things, but right now there is a large part of the PC market that simply cant extract much value from more hardware. So when you make the new OS depend on new hardware 'for the hell of it' you lose a lot of would be takers, on top of the largish number of folks that generally won't do an OS upgrade separate from the hardware anyway unless forced.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're a gamer, win11 is objectively worse unless you ONLY play latest games and ONLY on a very new PC.
It supports older games far worse than win10, which in turn is far worse than win7. But there's a decent argument now for win 10 over win 7 for gamers that DX12 has been finally rammed down game maker's throats and google stopped supporting chrome, meaning steam won't work on 7 in 2024.
The sad part is that until 2024, biggest gaming library support remains on 7. A lot of GoG games don't work on 10 in sp
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how old you are trying to go. But I play lots of old (mid-late 2000s games) with no problems on Win11. If you are trying to go older, then yeah, you are going to run into issues. And the issues aren't usually related to the OS anymore, it's the hardware. Ever install the OG Win95 version of Red Alert on Windows 7? It worked, technically, but because the game speed was tied to clock speed of the CPU, the slowest the game could go was still 10-20x faster than the game was original designed for. T
Re: (Score:2)
>But I play lots of old (mid-late 2000s games) with no problems on Win11.
How many is "lots"?
I've tried running five games in last few weeks. Win 7 starts out of the box, no problems. Win 10 no start on 3/5 out of the box, start out of the box on 2/5, community patch/settings fuckery available to make remaining 3/5 start. Win 11 no start on all, no advice on how to get them to start available, win 10 workarounds do not work.
Re: (Score:2)
Even gamers have largely avoided it due to clear messaging from the community and even MS's own update blurb: "Note: Some WindowsÂ10 features aren't available in WindowsÂ11. Certain apps and features may have additional requirements. "
That may be surprisingly honest but isn't the sort of thing that makes someone eager to adopt this new OS that, AFAIK, *basically* adds more rights management, fucks around with basic UI paradigms, and offers LITERALLY no actual benefit to adopt.
Re: (Score:2)
Some home user DO use their home computers for more intensive applications.
My main PC and my main notebook were both purchased to be capable video editing rigs, for example. That's a space where everything really WILL run better with proper hardware, even if that leads to oddball configs like putting an Intel Arc GPU in an AMD Threadripper system just because Resolve Studio does some tasks better with the Intel GPU than with a current RTXwhatever.
Just because most people don't do anything all that interest
Re: (Score:2)
Will it improve office productivity - nope, it will make it worse.
Windows 11 is an Agile product; it has changes for the sake of having changes, because all the devs need something deliverable in two week sprints. Now yes, they do some useful things, but those useful things are overshadowed by pointless and irritating changes.
Right now Microsoft is losing its stranglehold on the home computer, since home users are migrating to smart devices instead and when they're not the only application they really use
Natale Portman, grits, and lots of privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
> When 10 becomes dangerous
Interesting perspective.
Check out the exploit marketplace?
Re: (Score:3)
Hopefully MS will have either fixed 11 or released a less-shi
Nobody trusts Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
>Microsoft axed support for a raft of hardware with Windows 11, including older Intel CPUs, on security grounds.
Ideally, a company tries to provide a competitive product and make a profit from doing so.
Microsoft has enough of the market that they are more interested in finding new ways to extract money from you than they are in providing a product you will gladly pay for.
Everything they're doing these days involves ensuring you can only function with an always-on Internet connection so they can monetize you. Some of it is advertising, some of it is the subscription model. None of it is "here's this awesome must-have feature you should pay for".
If you have a second computer in your home you're willing to play with, try to find a noob-friendly flavour of Linux to try out. It's been the "Year of the Linux Desktop" longer than I can recall... and always been a lie for the common user, but it's actually pretty damn close now. You can download an image and it'll 'just work' on pretty much any hardware, and it's free.
I'm an IT geek of the Microsoft variety, I make my money off people who have trouble with Windows systems... but at home I am almost entirely Linux now, and I have a lot more computers (and VMs) than your average person. If you're browsing the web, watching videos, and using email, there's no longer any need to let Microsoft abuse you.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is a lot of "email, youtube and web" crowd is fine with a phone or a tablet. They no longer need a PC.
Home PC has increasingly gone toward "gaming related" and "rare niche uses" stuff instead. You'll have enterprise laptop from workplace, and you don't give a fuck about that one because it's a work computer, maintained by company IT. It is what they give you. You don't even have admin rights on it in most cases.
And for gamers, linux is same as it was before. Barely working emulation/VM/etc stuff. Ye
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget "old folks who need more than 8" screen real estate to be able to read the stuff".
Re: (Score:2)
Kindly stop calling me old. :-(
Re: (Score:2)
Unironically can't get my mother to upgrade from 24" screen to 27" or 32". I know she needs it. I can see her trying to get closer to the screen to read small text. Every suggestion to change it to a larger screen gets shot down faster than drones flying over frontline in Ukraine.
If you have good tips on how to make her accept a new larger monitor, thanks I can use any help offered.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything they're doing these days involves ensuring you can only function with an always-on Internet connection so they can monetize you. Some of it is advertising, some of it is the subscription model. None of it is "here's this awesome must-have feature you should pay for".
This. I no longer have ANY Windows installs on my machines (except for one VM on my laptop for some dev work), and it's specifically due to the BS Microsoft online account requirement. I'm even in the process of converting my son's PC and laptop to Mint Linux (and the desktop is a newly built gaming PC with TPM2 support!). He's a college student/gamer, and even HE has had it with Windows! Windows 11 is an absolute train wreck. Things he mentions specifically:
1. MS online account requirement
2. Bloatware
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree and would like to point out that, from the very beginning, Windows updates are a goddam shit load of Security Updates. Take a look at Update History. There's more in there than in the kernel.
Today's Windows install tip (Score:4, Informative)
> MS online account requirement
1) Start without an Internet connection
2) Try ALT-F10 (I've found it's not always ALT-F10 for some reason...)
3) In the command prompt window, type OOBE\BYPASSNRO
This should, in most cases, restart the initial setup without the online account requirement.
Re: (Score:3)
You can also just go ahead and "try to log in" with no@thankyou.com and any password - there will be "an error" and then it will just let you use a local account.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Nobody trusts Microsoft (Score:2)
Absolutely this. For years, I kept my machines dual-boot. Linux when possible, Windows when necessary. Windows wad necessary in two situations:
- Fancy MS Office documents (usually Excel) that LibreOffice couldn't handle. With Office365 running in the browser, that no longer happens.
- Gaming. Steam fixed gaming. Everything I play runs on Linux.
When I bought a new PC last year, I realized that I hadn't booted into Windows for ages. The new machine only has Linux.
Well....... (Score:2)
Hold up. (Score:3)
I remember Microsoft saying that Windows 10 was the last operating system. Why in the hell would anyone buy a new PC just to move to Windows 11 when they already made it very clear that Windows 10 was the end-all be-all OS?
Re:Hold up. (Score:5, Funny)
Because this one goes up to 11.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you aren't remembering what was said correctly.
Default Taskbar Sucks (Score:5, Insightful)
Outside of graphic design, and quickbooks, our company doesn't use specialized software. It's all in a web browser. Change prices on Walmart? Web browser. Email? Web browser. Spreadsheet? Web browser.
When you different tasks are simply different browser windows, the MacOS taskbar style becomes exponentially unhelpful. Even though we have multiple tabs open, they will be spread across different browser windows for better multi-tasking. In Windows 10, the taskbar can have the browser icon and the window title, so you know which to click on. Default Windows 11 doesn't have that. Similar to MacOS, you just have to click random shit. And then power users with 4 monitors, Windows 11 and MacOS don't let you configure it so that application icon only appears on the monitor taskbar where the window actually is. Example: If spotify and Google Chat are on my bottom right monitor of my 4-monitor setup, there is no need for their taskbar entry to appear on the other 3 monitors.
tl;dr
In a world with more and more web-based software, Windows 11 / MacOS's taskbar sucks. Having 4-5 browser windows just have the same stupid browser icon and nothing else fails to communicate the contents.
Re: (Score:2)
You can right click on a running application in Dock on MacOS and see all the open windows therein.
Re: (Score:3)
You can mouse over an icon in the task bar on Windows and see all the open windows. It's still clumsy compared to having a vertical taskbar with separate items per window if you're frequently switching between multiple windows for the same application.
This cpuld have been there OS X (Score:2)
They can't *seriously* be surprised (Score:2)
Microsoft has gone decades with "two teams" and one of them sucks:
Every time they sunset one of the bad ones, there's no outcry, no issues, etc. Every time they try to sunset one of the OK ones, there's a major outcry and they end up supporting it through extended contracts for years.
If they had a clue, they'd just dismantle the non-NT development
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing Windows 12 will probably come out next year!
Re: (Score:3)
I'd disagree. '98 was still the 16/32 bit version with the DOS underpinning. 98SE was very good given its design requirements.
98's successor was ME, and that was a steaming pile of dung that even Microsoft probably doesn't admit ever existed.
Re: (Score:3)
3.11 was the last version of Windows that truly ran on top of MS DOS.
With 95 you could still boot your PC in MS-DOS, launch Windows with "win", then exit from Windows back to a DOS prompt.
Re: (Score:3)
98 had no DOS underpinning in any meaningful sense, it just had a lot of backwards compatibility for DOS apps.
3.11 was the last version of Windows that truly ran on top of MS DOS.
Yes, with the minor detail that the system virtual machine (where all higher-level Windows action happens) in Win9x has a full-fledged DOS underneath ready to be invoked if need arises, with a full set of DOS APIs and a DPMI interface to facilitate the transition from protected to real mode (actually V86 mode). And the VMM32.VXD "memory manager" where the lower-level Windows action happens, is just a rehash of the good old "EMM386/WIN386" expanded memory emulator/DOS multitasker. The difference between Wind
Re: They can't *seriously* be surprised (Score:2)
You are aware NT was a basis from Windows XP and onwards right? Last DOS version was NE.
Re:They can't *seriously* be surprised (Score:5, Informative)
Windows NT - Good
Windows 2000 - Fantastic!
Windows XP - OK
Windows Vista - Bad
Windows 7 - Excellent
Windows 8 - Bad
Windows 10 - Good
Windows 11 - TBD
Re: (Score:2)
If they had a clue, they'd just dismantle the non-NT development team and find a way to split the actual smart people on the NT team in half.
Everything has been NT-based since Windows XP.
... usable (barely) but only with the addition of some
The problem is not "two teams". The problem is there is only one team and it is run by idiots. Nobody in their right mind can look at Windows 7 and then look at Windows 8 and say "Oh yeah, this is a good idea."
For some reason, that I still can't figure out, Microsoft has been on a crusade to completely destroy Windows, beginning with Windows 8 and continuing to the current Windows 11.
Windows 11 is
I'd be happy to upgrade, but my CPU isn't supporte (Score:2)
That's basically the issue. I actually prefer Windows 11's interface. It's more consistent than Windows 10. But I have a workstation with a pair of Xeon's that are not compatible with Windows 11. It's a fine workstation otherwise. The workstation works fine and there's no other reason to upgrade it, so I'll be stuck with Windows 10 for now.
Re: I'd be happy to upgrade, but my CPU isn't supp (Score:2)
Sooooo... I hope you are aware an Intel core i3 13100 CPU is more powerful than both anything on AM3, AM3+ and the 7900k? This means a $130 CPU beats whatever you are rocking right now.
You can get Mobo + RAM + CPU for $300-$400. A 5700X build could also be interesting, though 13th gen is a much better deal than AM4 builds.
Re: I'd be happy to upgrade, but my CPU isn't supp (Score:4, Insightful)
So create more tech waste because Microsoft says you should? Why throw away perfectly good hardware that is not broken?
Re: (Score:3)
You are missing the point. I already have a computer that plays the games I want to play. Why should I pay a thousand dollars for a computer that does the exact same thing (admittedly, a little faster) as the one I already have when the one I have is not broken? And again, if I replace the one I have it'll end up as electronic waste despite having been perfectly fit for purpose.
You are advocating replacement for the sake of replacement. Not for improvement over the current situation; simply because there is
Re: (Score:2)
Sooooo... I hope you are aware an Intel core i3 13100 CPU is more powerful than both anything on AM3, AM3+ and the 7900k? This means a $130 CPU beats whatever you are rocking right now.
You can get Mobo + RAM + CPU for $300-$400. A 5700X build could also be interesting, though 13th gen is a much better deal than AM4 builds.
The I3 might be faster (in some ways,perhaps not multitasking workloads I dont know) but why spend money when the existing computer does everything you need? All because MS wants to force an upgrade hardware cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, no one should waste their money on an i3 at all for an actual PC.
Re: (Score:2)
Guy has old Xeons. Where did he mention AM3+ hardware?
Windows 10 with Ads (Score:3)
Somebody just asked me about this yesterday.
I asked him if he had any reason to move to a newer version and he said no.
He wasn't interested in the ads.
Other than games and Matlab ChromeOS would suffice but maybe Google will borrow from SteamOS before 2025.
The Win10 latency fixes are enough for his needs so he's not going to accept Win11.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And for some things it takes longer to do simple tasks for no discernible reason.
Like what? It's essentially the same as Win10. Everything should take the same amount of time on Win11.
Re: (Score:2)
People keep complaining about ads but I have been on Win11 since they first released it to Insiders, on both unsupported and supported hardware. I can remember only seeing one or two ads in total. I'm on this PC for at least 8 hours every day. One in my notifications related to Office365 before I logged into my Office365 account, never saw it again. And one for the equivalent of some mobile game that was half pre-installed and I simply uninstalled it, never saw it again. If there have been more, I haven't n
Upgrading to Win10 was fine (Score:3)
The story here really misremembers the move to Win10. XP -> Vista/7 was the big requirement jump. 10 ran great on anything that ran 7. It was a free upgrade, and it undid most of the things people hated about Win8, so most people were ok with upgrading.
Win 11 doesn't really offer anything new, but it offers a lot of change for the sake of change. The UI seems to offer a little to piss off almost everyone, but not everyone is in agreement about which parts are the bad parts.
The TPM chip requirement was a issue, but the chips have been standard long enough that it's really only the earliest Win10 PCs that didn't have them. Most of those people have probably upgraded their PC by now, even if they stuck to Win10 on the newer one.
One big driver toward Win11 will be the modern Intel CPUs with asymmetric cores. Win10 doesn't know how to schedule tasks well on those CPUs. That's probably the biggest tech reason that will push people toward 11 in the near future. Anyone that needs CPU performance will either have to go Intel+Win11 or stick to Ryzen for Win10.
Re:Upgrading to Win10 was fine (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm seriously considering the conversion to Linux for the day to day stuff. The old reasons to not do it mostly aren't there anymore. Even the gaming reason is mostly melting away.
Re: (Score:2)
the TPM thing was nice because you could forestall MS pushing 11 on you by disabling it in bios.
>avoid being pestered to upgrade to an even more garbage version of windows with this one easy trick
Re: (Score:2)
The TPM chip requirement was a issue, but the chips have been standard long enough that it's really only the earliest Win10 PCs that didn't have them. Most of those people have probably upgraded their PC by now, even if they stuck to Win10 on the newer one.
Unfortunately, my pricey 2016 CPU was an Intel K series -- the model Intel decided didn't need a TPM built-in since it was the over-clocking and more expensive model. Meanwhile it has a fast SSD, 16gb ram, and works very well to this day for all my uses (no longer game so there is no reason to upgrade).
Yet, I am faced having to upgrade just to keep the OS current in 2015. In prior Windows releases, the OS might just be slower if my computer didnt meet the CPU or ram requirements, thus giving me the choice
Re: (Score:2)
One big driver toward Win11 will be the modern Intel CPUs with asymmetric cores. Win10 doesn't know how to schedule tasks well on those CPUs.
As far as I remember the scheduler in Win10 was updated to support the P/E core processors.
The summary is misleading. (Score:3)
"The result was that hardware that will run Windows 10 perfectly well will not accept the new operating system."
That's misleading. It's not the hardware that has the problem with the software. The real problem is that the OS will not install on the hardware. This is a really backwards move on the part of Microsoft. Making perfectly good hardware "obsolete" creates unnecessary e-waste and extra costs for the end user.
Win 7 EOL... (Score:2)
Pushed me to Linux. It's become significantly easier now that everything is done in a web browser. More and more games are working on Linux, especially older ones but even newer ones. Baldur's Gate 3 works just fine on my Xubuntu install. Sure, it's not a native install but via Steam I clicked a few buttons and it's fine.
I don't play many new games anyway so it's hardly an issue.
If all someone does is activities in a web browser, the OS hardly matters anymore.
Same Thing, Different OS Version . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
As the Open Shell project shows any version of Windows works fine with any previous version of the UI. Why don't they offer an number of UIs that you can easily switch back and forth between? And how can they possibly justify why they don't do this?
(I like to call the Win 8 and later UIs the "Let's hide controls and put as much wasted white space on the screen as possible" interface!)
The biggest reason that no one wants the newer OS versions is Microsoft wants to majorly up their game in surveillance marketing after watching Google, Facebook, and other online companies make huge money sucking up all of our personal info. They are endlessly talking to us about increasing security while at the same time trying to increase how much info the OS can suck up and send home to them. Those two goals are completely in conflict with each other. Telling any big internet connected company all your personal info is the exact opposite of any version of "security"!
So Microsoft, Want me to be interested in your newest OS? Don't try to force me to log into a "Microsoft account". An online account to use a local computer is just another security risk that offers me nothing. Stop trying to make the OS require (or even need) an internet connection. I am perfectly capable of personally accessing the Internet when I want to access the internet. Stop having the OS force me to do things on my computer. You don't know how I am using it and your forced changes aren't helping. AND STOP ROLLING UP SECURITY FIXES WITH "FEATURE UPDATES". We can decide if we want "features". Security updates should just fix security issues.
Been running for 18 months (Score:2)
I have been running it for quite a while. Other than running into some issues with application support, it's fine. I actually prefer some of the features in it as opposed to Windows 10. Just little tweaks you don't notice until they are gone.
I think I notice the way I layout screens the most. Having to support both takes a bit because I will run into something that Windows 10 doesn't have.
Windows 12? DirectX 13? (Score:2)
I have a feeling Microsoft somehow thought people would be ok with Windows 11. It’s kinda sucky and has more spyware than Windows 10 but even if it didn’t we all know it’s on the WindowsME side of the Microsoft enshittification cycle and would be wary even if it were perfect.
I think they plan on doing a short cycle to Windows12 and pairing the release with a new version of DirectX with no win10 support, getting some gamers to make the switch in hopes others will follow. I further suspect
w11 is shit (Score:2)
everything from painful and nonsensical UI changes, to the strong-arming the 'windows account' cuntery (yeah, that's some shit. you have to yank your internet access and use a command in a hidden console window to avoid using their bullshit windows account) disallowing users to block updates (easily that is. No, 'delaying' them for 2 weeks is bullshit. it's my computer, fuck off!)
Then the constant nagging/mommying to use their services .. for example.. I use an xbox controller for gaming; and without their
What's the difference? (Score:2)
TPM (Score:2)
For me it's TPM. I don't want to replace my mainboard just to get a TPM chip when literally everything else on my PC meets spec. And no there is no TPM module available for it.
Re: (Score:2)
For me it's TPM. I don't want to replace my mainboard just to get a TPM chip when literally everything else on my PC meets spec. And no there is no TPM module available for it.
Exactly. It's such a BS requirement.
It's not an upgrade if the new version is inferior (Score:2)
Performance is in the toilet. Dumb, simple tasks now take 30 seconds. Task switching has been needlessly made more difficult by removing essential features (The 'never combine taskbar icons' option).
Win11 has failed (Score:3)
From the DEEPLY broken UI.
To patches that have annihilated basic functionality.
Windows 11 is just a gigantic bucket of bad.
I figured I'd try it about a year ago.
Was starting to see a bunch more clients using it.
It has NEVER gotten any better.
To the point where I needed a 3rd party taskbar JUST TO USE THE INTERFACE!
Finally, the SSD bug hit me and destroyed sytstem performance.
And I was done.
I've rolled back to Windows 10 and don't plan to EVER move forward if Win11 (or something based on it) is what I'm facing.
When did the media become obsessed with upgrades? (Score:5, Insightful)
Throughout all of Microsoft history users have upgraded OSes involuntarily, almost universally with new hardware. People didn't go out seeking new windows, they went out and got new machines with new windows on it and then set about complaining about the change.
At what point did we suddenly change history and get obsessed with the idea that users want a new OS, or seek a new OS, or are even willing to use a new OS. Here's how actual users work:
- Girlfriend upgraded her Android version by accident when she misclicked while aiming for the 100th press of the ignore / later button.
- Complete mishmash of Windows 10 / Windows 11 machines in this house. The ones which came with Windows 10 have windows 10 on them. The ones which came with windows 11 have windows 11 on them. Literally no one here gives a rats arse about changing one to the other.
- Father asked me the other day if he should upgrade to Windows 11. I said he'll gain little for it and may as well wait until support ends so that mother won't complain and don't don't need to play tech support.
No one cares about ads or privacy. Of the few which do, they aren't under any delusion that Windows 11 is worse than Windows 10.
No one cares about upgrades. If the hardware doesn't run it, they'll keep using old versions until something forces their upgrade, the world has been like this since Windows 95.
No one cares about OSes, people don't use OSes, they use applications.
Windows 11 hardware requirements are unreasonable (Score:3)
Windows 11 hardware requirements are unreasonable. It's not for performance reasons, but for so-called "security" reasons. Every Windows 10 computer today can run Windows 11 except for this artificial restrictions imposed by MSFT.
I predict a government action or a lawsuit to either extend Windows 10 support or remove the artificial (and unreasonable) Windows 11 restrictions.
Otherwise, the surge of e-waste will be astronomical.
My mum's Windows (Score:5, Interesting)
Far back in the mists of ancient time I built my mum a Win 7 machine. She was very happy with it.
One day it died and the idiot tech she called sold her a new machine. The new machine came with Win 10. From then on she was unhappy because her computer kept changing, moving things round and generally being user-unfriendly. She is over 80 years old, and doesn't cope well with stuff that changes itself.
So I rummaged in my garage, found an old Socket A mainboard and a dualcore and built her another Win7 box. And once again, she is blissfully happy with her computer.
She doesn't need a computer that goes up to 11 - she just needs a computer with a straightforward UI that she can drive easily, and enough CPU power to render a 1080p Netflix stream.
For many, the computer is a tool that is used to get stuff done. It would help a lot if users didn't have to learn a new UI to move from last year's OS to this year's, and again next year.
One word: "taskbar" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Not Even the Ghost of Obsolescence Can Coerce. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Amiga
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that for most remaining Windows-Users the key reason is that the games they want to play only run on Windows, the answer is probably SteamOS.
Whether that's really so much better is debatable, though.
Re: (Score:3)
eComStation
Arca OS [arcanoae.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We're probably 6 months away from having a usable replacement and then we're ditching Windows everywhere.
Probably something Debian-based.
6 months out and probably? If you can't plan, you can't predict.
Re: Not Even the Ghost of Obsolescence Can Coerce. (Score:4, Interesting)
You're projecting. I'm not a moron. I'm a retired IT guy who has done several buildouts from scratch and I replaced an entire enterprise of Macs, including printers and servers with Windows shit.
You are not a systems person of any grade compared to the rest of us.
Use /. to learn and quit showing your ass.
I was supporting all the Mac Machines for my division of a thousand plus, probably a hundred macs total. We had about 50 people plus a department head to try to keep the Windows machines operating, and they had to call me in at times, because they were swamped.
It really was job security, and I liked to ask them how much they saved on those superior PC's when the salaries plus benefits were taken into account.
But the Windows only mantra was strong. Weird thing was for 90 percent of everyone's work, The Macs did exactly what the Windows machines did, other than not quit working after patch Tuesday. We actually would not schedule big meetings on Wednesdays after patch Tuesday. It was amazing what the burn rate of 50 suits in the middle of six figures has. But you know how that works.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's already a de facto subscription model for everyone. Enterprise pays with money, consumers with their data.
Re: (Score:2)
And enterprise is moving to cloud, and that's subscription. We're being told today to migrate all data into the Azure cloud - then also a caveat in the same meeting, don't move too much data because it's expensive!
Re: (Score:2)
Enterprise has been per license monthly for decades regardless of using the cloud.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
clearly it's easier to create an entirely new version of an OS like windows that is simply worse than what came before, than patching whatever security / performance issues might exist.
in most other industries sabotaging your existing product to drive purchases of new versions would lead to prosecution.