• goldteeth@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    172
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 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.

    • stealth_cookies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      That is half the reason I have it disabled on my desktop. The other half being that the BIOS updates never fixed the fTPM stuttering issues for my computer (both using the 3700X and 5800X) so the computer is unusable with it turned on.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    4 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…

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    128
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 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.

      • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        Like what? I’m still using my 2011 MacBook Pro, and my phone is about six years old.

        I can’t update my 2011 MBP to the latest version of OSX, but it still works fantastically for everyday stuff. Phone can update to the next version of iOS.

        • notTheCat@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          can’t update

          Yeah, that’s the problem, if your hardware can run the latest software, it should be able to update to the latest software

          • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            4 months ago

            It’s THIRTEEN YEARS OLD! It still functions! If it stops functioning, I can put Linux on it!

            It’s a first-gen Core i7… I don’t think the hardware would support the latest version that well, if at al.

              • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                not even a browser

                Try Firefox maybe? Safari and Firefox work perfectly on my 13 year old MacBook… I don’t know what’s wrong with your machine.

                Edit: you can’t put Windows 11 on a 13 year old machine, that’s a straight-up lie. Mind you, not because the hardware is broken or unsupported, but because Microsoft simply refuses to allow it.

      • ben@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah as much as this sucks I honestly hope that Microsoft will actually take advantage of this and start moving legacy support into more specialized options.

        A lot of the reason windows is so janky at times is because of the insane obsession they have with backwards compatibility.

        • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Lol, worst take I have ever heard.

          1. Windows has no purpose these days outside backwards compatibility.

          2. Windows primarily sucks because of ads and forced updates, not jank.

          3. Microsoft exclusively deals in antiquated spaghetti code, removing backwards compatibility won’t change that.

          4. Microsoft has no interest in improving users experience they have invested entirely in squeezing in micro transactions not exactly a user first design philosophy.

        • MinFapper@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          False.

          I work for Microsoft and I can assure you that any effort I make to increase code quality or reduce jank (or pretty much anything other than shoving more AI in our products) will not positively impact my bonus next year.

          • mrvictory1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Are you working on Windows or another product? Also do you know why MS expects ROI for new Windows features ie. Amazon Appstore? Since Windows is a paid product (at least for OEMs) I would expect license income to sustain feature development.

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

      At the very least, they should be releasing some “Lite” version for older hardware or something.

      It’s such a catch-22 with Linux, because you’re not going to see ads for it and most “normal” people don’t even know what it is (and that they have a viable alternative to Windows).

      I don’t want ads for Linux, but I wish there was a way to elevate it into the general public consciousness so people are aware that they even have an option. AND ITS FREE.

    • Lila_Uraraka@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      4 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

      • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I’ve lost count of how many times Microsoft, and many other big tech companies, hindered me from doing something I wanted to do on a device that I own for “security” reasons while it had absolutely nothing to do with security and everything to do with forcing their users to comply with their business model.

        DRM chips have nothing to do with device security and everything to do with further controlling what you can and cannot do on your machine and making more money off of you.

        You really shouldn’t believe the Corporate bad faith arguments used to justify anti-consumer practices.

        • Breadhax0r@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          My job has radicalized me against windows, the settings are factory reset quite frequently due to updates or reimaging so I’m constantly resetting every single option just to get it back to a continent state (Who in their right mind thinks centered task bar icons is a good thing!?!?!)

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 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.

      • azuth@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why won’t they get a virus or something on Windows 10 with that same hardware?

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    “By god we have got to stop people from using Windows!”

    Uh. Yes. Do that.

  • Zier@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    And here I am using a modern Linux OS on a 15 year old desktop without any issues or nagging to log into an online account or to backup all my shit to some server, open to hackers, in windows world.

  • thearch@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    4 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
      15
      ·
      4 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
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        4 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
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 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.

  • vortexal@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 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
      30
      ·
      4 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.

      • Defaced@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        This right here, the whole tpm requirement was most likely pushed from OEM’s wanting to sell new hardware.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    but it seems that the Redmond giant has decided that enough is enough.

    But why? People who take the effort have their reasons, find other ways.

    Btw, Rufus patches the iso, works anyway.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s not only TPM. Older chips are missing some actual security features. AMD not patching their old CPUs of their firmware bug will also become a big problem in the long run.

      • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I doubt it, because those bugs require to already have extensive access to the victim PC. Basically, they just expand the trouble on an already compromised system. It’s bad for sure, but at that point you’re already knee deep in shit and this just adds a few buckets on top.

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          The AMD bug requires the same access that any of serious previous exploits have given. You don’t need physical access. Any exploit that gives root means the payload can be the AMD firmware exploit which will make it permanently undetectable by anti virus and wiping the os won’t remove it.

          For example the ssh exploit from years ago allowed root without even an account on the machine. Those affected detected they had been owned, wiped their machines and restored from backup. If something like that happens again, (https://thehackernews.com/2024/07/new-openssh-vulnerability-could-lead-to.html?m=1) you won’t be able to know you are owned.

          • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Any exploit that gives root

            Same in green. If the attacker has physical access or root, you have lost already.

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

              This AMD firmware exploit is different. Yes if an exploit gets your computer you have lost. But it happens to thousands every day. A virus scan will detect it and an OS wipe will clean it.

              This AMD exploit means the exploit lives inside the CPU firmware. It can’t ever be detected or removed by normal means because the CPU itself is compromised. (Unless you have the hardware to pull physical signals off your dram chips.)

              In the past even normal OS patches would clear out any virus’s lingering in the PC population. Now you could be compromised and never know or be able to do anything about it.

              • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                4 months ago

                A virus scan will detect it and an OS wipe will clean it.

                This only works before the malware has been executed and only if the malware scanner knows it. Often Antivirus can block access to the malware, so it can’t be executed.

                If it has been executed, the PC needs to be shut down and all writable mediums connected wiped (including boot sectors and EFI), maybe even the BIOS reset, if it can be updated, to be 100% clean. If you can’t do this, you have to toss the PC in the trash.

                If the PC is not shut down, the malware could still survive in RAM and re-install its files or download something else, eg. a remote shell or rootkit.

                These processor security flaws just extend this to the CPU firmware, meaning you need to reset this too, after malware has been executed on the PC. If you just downloaded it and the antivirus blocked and deleted it, you’re still safe.

                If it got executed and you or a technician can’t remove it from the CPU, you have to toss the PC in the trash, just like you already had to if you can’t reset a malware that flashed itself into an updatable BIOS, for example.

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

                  Offline virus scanners are standard. That’s always how you detect if you have been infected. Bios viruses are detected and removed by standard anti-virus software.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not for Microsoft.

        “Sorry, you’re running an unsupported, deliberately hacked version of our OS. We can’t help you.”

  • Brownian Motion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    4 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.

    • x00z@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I just moved to Linux and started fresh.

      The big mental change was instead of searching “sony vegas on linux please” I just started searching for “video editing software Linux”, and take any possible limitations and live with them, as I know it’s only temporary until Linux catches on.

      • Myro@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        What exactly do you mean, Linux had been "catching on’ since decades, you may need to wait for a while…

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 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.

    • Halosheep@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 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
        28
        ·
        4 months ago

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

        • Halosheep@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Obviously, but we’re talking about a really, really small subset of users that probably would earn Microsoft less than a week of coffee in their corporate office.

        • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 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?

      • frazorth@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        This question makes no sense.

        Most Windows users are not technical enough to do component upgrades. And yes they get money from new system sales.

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

          People who are technical enough to get around the system requirements to install windows 11 on a system that doesn’t meet the minimum requirements is most likely technical enough to upgrade their own computer.

      • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        people can’t upgrade.

        people see their computer isn’t supported.

        people buy a new computer.

        oems license windows.

  • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Well, they won’t be able to sell as many new computers if they let people keep using their old ones.

    • MyFairJulia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      Microsoft still makes money off the OEM licenses AFAIK. The Linux community had a whole day about this back in the 90s.

        • ABCDE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          I know, just clarifying that their main business isn’t selling hardware.

            • ABCDE@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              4 months ago

              The comment was about selling new computers and not using old ones. They want to sell more software, they aren’t hardware focused.

              • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                And that comment was 100% correct. They want more computers sold, because more computers sold means more Windows licences sold.

                You’re acting like PC hardware sales are unrelated to Windows license sales. They’re directly related.

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

                  Here’s the quote:

                  they won’t be able to sell as many new computers

                  Their sales of hardware are insignificant.