Microsoft says you won't be able to swerve Windows 11 min specs

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The system requirement wouldn't be so bad if they tried explaining why, all we've had is a load of meaningless verbiage. Keeping devices more productive, having a better experience, and better security than ever before so they can stay protected is great and all but without explaining how it's nothing but marketing/PR waffle, how or what about the system requirements are going to mean my device is more productive versus something like Ryzen 1 CPU, what about TPM (if i have no use for BitLocker) is going to protect my device, why are these system requirements going to result in better security than ever before.

It is more MS gratuitous backpatting,like they did before Vista and Windows 8/8.1 on how everyone was wrong and they were right,and ignored customer feedback. But unlike then,there are real personal computing alternatives for lots of the masses. MS seems to have forgotten this.

Plus business laptops already had TPM2 due to the use of Win10 Pro/Enterprise,etc so its not even a business move really. Yet even if you have TPM2,etc on their own branded products Windows 11 won't run. Like Intel the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

I mean i get that Microsoft have turned their backs on the 'technically' minded people that helped make Windows what it is today because they want Windows to be an emotive experience like Apple but those 'technically' minded people, who i may add are often making the decisions on whether to use X software, want to know more than how lovely the experience is or that it's just going to make them more secure without any idea of how.

That is the point I am trying to make. The non-technically minded people increasingly use iOS/Android based devices. Now,look at the Apple M1,its capable for general purpose tasks and is basically based on a smartphone SOC. So now think in the next few years how powerful these devices are going to be for general use.Now you have things such as wireless displays longterm you can see smartphones being able to be docked,etc. So I am uncertain what MS is trying to do - from their constant breaking of Windows 10,and them increasing removing the unique selling aspects of Windows,etc its almost like they are actively trying to lose customers.

So who is Windows 11 for?? Like Windows 10 its becoming more and more dumbed down and restrictive for techies,it very restrictive on what hardware it uses(for no real reason) and for non-techies I can't see how it really changes anything? MS failed miserably with its smartphone OS,so Android/iOS just have way too market penetration. Even Huawei is going to probably have a greater chance of penetrating that market with Harmony OS.

MS are just really short sighted as a company. They have enough resources to allow the OS to be customised for both power users and non-techies if they wanted to - its what you see with Android,lots of variations in UI aspects from different companies. But MS again just go marching forward regardless of what anyone says,and their supporters will clap enthusiastically as the trench gets dug!

I'll upgrade my hardware when I want not at their beck and call.

That is the issue - if MS is trying to force upgrades like with iOS/Android devices and reduce lifespans,etc whilst iOS/Android are now pushing longer support,people can merge device requirements.

Techy people might just decide to go Linux and Valve has done a lot to make Linux viable for gaming. Even the new Steamdeck is Linux based,and that has not put off PC Gamers from ordering it in record numbers.

We already see consoles doing quite well,so its not like Windows is really needed for competitive gaming systems.

[3dcandy]

It is more MS gratuitous backpatting,like they did before Vista and Windows 8/8.1 on how everyone was wrong and they were right,and ignored customer feedback. But unlike then,there are reall personal computing alternatives for lots of the masses. MS seems to have forgotten this.


That is the point I am trying to make. The non-technically minded people increasingly use iOS/Android based devices. Now,look at the Apple M1,its capable for general purpose tasks and is basically based on a smartphone SOC. So now think in the next few years how powerful these devices are going to be for general use. So I am uncertain what MS is trying to do - from their constant breaking of Windows 10,and them increasing removing the unique selling aspects of Windows,etc its almost like they are actively trying to lose customers.



That is the issue - if MS is trying to force upgrades like with iOS/Android devices and reduce lifespans,etc whilst iOS/Android are now pushing longer support,people can merge device requirements. Techy people might just decide to go Linux and Valve has done a lot to make Linux viable for gaming. Even the new Steamdeck is Linux based,and that has not put off PC Gamers from ordering it in record numbers.

You do realise that a lot of Win 11 is to help with ARM cpu's don't you? The scheduler and changes under the hood are all basically to make Win 11 work better on an M1 style cpu, which both Intel and AMD are releasing soon. The majority of the changes are all about making mixed cores work better. This is also the reason for the more modern cpu requirements. Win 10 does not use mixed cores well and in it's current form never will. So to help with that we will get Win 11 and it's newer requirements. Your post there comes across as pretty hypocritical because it seems like you want MS to do something yet you also don't want them to address what is happening in the hardware world

[DanceswithUnix]

You do realise that a lot of Win 11 is to help with ARM cpu's don't you?

The thing there is that the CPU used, other than perhaps an "Intel Inside" sticker, is utterly invisible to the average user. You just don't release a new OS for that. They could just stick the new scheduler on Windows 10, job done. I mean, they didn't bother with a version number shift when ARM support came in for Windows 10?

If they want to enforce secure boot, then that's a very visible step change because lots of existing hardware won't be able to update to it and the rolling Windows 10 train stops for some users. That's a situation that needs managing, and hence a narrative for upping the Windows version makes sense.

I think the mixed core handling is just something they threw in "while we are at it" to try and tempt people over with an improved performance. For consumers MS usually upgrade DIrectX and block installing on older OS versions to try and temp us over. They need to throw us some sort of bone or we won't play.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The issue is again if you remove the unique selling points of Windows,then who is it for? Techies will move elsewhere,and if you want to make the support more like Android/iOS,why does a non-techy need to get a Windows device? You might as well just use your current iOS/Android device and not bother with the Windows one. Merge the requirements.That is the reality - 4 billion Android/iOS devices against 1.3 billion Windows 10 devices.

Most of us are oldies who grew up with Windows,just like the oldies before grew up with other OSes,and felt wedded to them. People are not as wedded to Windows like even 10 years ago.

MS needs to be pushing its unique Windows selling points,not trying to streamline and make it shadow of itself,is going to push away more techy users,and is not going to suddenly make people who have their Android/iOS tablet/smartphone to ditch those. Things like wireless displays,etc will eventually mean those mobile devices can be increasingly used in a home environment like a docked Switch.

Plus if everything is in the "cloud" why do you need to run the cloud applications under Windows?? People here are making the assumption Windows 11 will have some ironclad hold over average consumers,that they have no alternatives. The reality is there are alternatives for most normal users now. Many children nowadays are not growing up with Windows devices,so what happens in 10 years??

MS has learnt nothing from Android. Various iterations of the UI with the same underlying code - yet MS stubbornly seems to be shoehorning a one size fits all strategy,which makes it Jack of all trades,master of none.

The thing there is that the CPU used, other than perhaps an "Intel Inside" sticker, is utterly invisible to the average user. You just don't release a new OS for that. They could just stick the new scheduler on Windows 10, job done. I mean, they didn't bother with a version number shift when ARM support came in for Windows 10?

If they want to enforce secure boot, then that's a very visible step change because lots of existing hardware won't be able to update to it and the rolling Windows 10 train stops for some users. That's a situation that needs managing, and hence a narrative for upping the Windows version makes sense.

I think the mixed core handling is just something they threw in "while we are at it" to try and tempt people over with an improved performance. For consumers MS usually upgrade DIrectX and block installing on older OS versions to try and temp us over. They need to throw us some sort of bone or we won't play.

Linux already has improved in leaps and bounds WRT to gaming,and I was very sceptical about Valve's efforts on here. I am surprised how much better its got - I even got Vortex and mods working under Linux.

If the Steam Deck performs well in terms of game compatibility, that basically proves Linuxactually now has a place as true Windows alternative for PC gaming.

[DanceswithUnix]

The issue is again if you remove the unique selling points of Windows,then who is it for?

I think for home users MS are just considering how they can unify the XBOX and gaming PCs. They've been trying for ages, long enough that SteamOS is fairly mature now as a reaction to it. I think this is going to be a pretty big push for native DRM and more use of the MS store.
How old is the MS Store now? I don't use it. It isn't more invasive than the Android store that I *do* use. Or Steam which I use for that matter. MS must want to fix that.

Business users will buy machines currently on a 5 year lease purchase cycle before they go on the WEEE pile for recycling, replaced with a new box/laptop that then gets instantly re-imaged with whatever the IT dept want on it. That just happens whatever MS do anyway.

[Ferral]

I sourced a 20 pin 1.2 TPM (before they shifted the goalposts to TPM 2) and also changed my boot drive to be secure boot using mbr2gpt but I still cannot get Windows 11 given my CPU is a Haswell 4790K. My system now is around 5 years old and I have no issues with anything on it and majority of games run just fine 1080 maxxed out or 1440 at med/high detail.

To be able to upgrade going to have to get a new board, CPU & DDR

I think MS are shooting themselves in the foot excluding a huge userbase from being able to upgrade to the new OS.

I imagine this will further push Valve to make all games work with SteamOS and work will ramp up on the Linux builds for gaming and Vulkan support will also ramp up so folk will be able to start ditching Windows as there will be viable alternatives.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I think for home users MS are just considering how they can unify the XBOX and gaming PCs. They've been trying for ages, long enough that SteamOS is fairly mature now as a reaction to it. I think this is going to be a pretty big push for native DRM and more use of the MS store.
How old is the MS Store now? I don't use it. It isn't more invasive than the Android store that I *do* use. Or Steam which I use for that matter. MS must want to fix that.

Business users will buy machines currently on a 5 year lease purchase cycle before they go on the WEEE pile for recycling, replaced with a new box/laptop that then gets instantly re-imaged with whatever the IT dept want on it. That just happens whatever MS do anyway.

Well I think people will just invest more in their iOS/Android devices in the next 5~10 years. The Apple M1 is a wake-up call,because it makes non-Windows devices now fast enough for a lot of things which you would use Windows for. A family member has one of the new Samsung Galaxy Tabs and its perfectly performant for media usage,light image editing,word processing,etc. Like I said some of the longest users of Windows devices between upgrades are non-techies. If MS is trying to shorten lifespans,upgrades,etc people might just not bother in the next 5~10 years. Cloud applications are also platform agnostic.

Yes,MS is trying to be big on gaming but I just think gamers increasingly will be one of the few groups which are still very wedded to Windows. However,Valve and Epic are not too friendly with MS,so we might see an increased push for Linux alternatives.

Also,basically Google,Qualcomm,Samsung,etc are now trying to push support to 4~5 years(Samsung Enterprise devices are 5 years now IIRC),and iOS is supported for 5~6 years. The US military already is increasing using them both,so even users with stringent requirements are warming to them both over the last few years. So like I said I am uncertain what MS is trying to do here,they can push,but its removing several unique selling points of Windows.But the issue is iOS/Android is so embedded I am uncertain how its going to work out.

However,the reality is MS does not need to this one size fits all mentality. As shown by Android its not hard to allow personalised versions of the GUI on top. Its worked fine for Android. It seems more design by committee by MS. It sort of reminds me of Intel,they got very complacent. Its why AMD managed to do what it did - Intel had way too much hubris.

The issue is too many are taken in by the current financials of MS,but Intel was doing well for years too before its issues surfaced. Lots of the rot set in during the good years due to hurbis.

I sourced a 20 pin 1.2 TPM (before they shifted the goalposts to TPM 2) and also changed my boot drive to be secure boot using mbr2gpt but I still cannot get Windows 11 given my CPU is a Haswell 4790K. My system now is around 5 years old and I have no issues with anything on it and majority of games run just fine 1080 maxxed out or 1440 at med/high detail.

To be able to upgrade going to have to get a new board, CPU & DDR

I think MS are shooting themselves in the foot excluding a huge userbase from being able to upgrade to the new OS.

I imagine this will further push Valve to make all games work with SteamOS and work will ramp up on the Linux builds for gaming and Vulkan support will also ramp up so folk will be able to start ditching Windows as there will be viable alternatives.

I built a Linux system to give Proton and Lutris a test. It worked far better than expected!

[Saracen999]

Not sure how blocking people from upgrading is going to keep devices more productive, have a better experience, and better security than ever before so they can stay protected, in just over 3 years they won't be, they'll just be a mountain of e-waste.

Also i know companies want people to always buy the new thing they've just released but calling their own devices "capable but slightly out of date" when they're only 4 years old is a bit extreme, even Apple support their hardware longer than that.

Weeellll, ..... okay. It can be done. Kind-of. In some circumstances.

My plan is :-

1) When W11 is actually finalised, or indeed a couple (probably between 2 and 6) of months after, decide if I want it, as-is. And if I do, and can, upgrade.

2) If I do want to, and can, but not "as is", does an acceptable fix, be it 3rd-party tool or even reistry hack, exist? If so, upgrade and apply fix.

3) But if I don't want to, or can't, upgrade then stick with W10 while it's supported.

Where things get a bit sticky is post-2025. Prior to that, just about anybody can do 1) to 3). And I consider that when I installed W10, even the moral contract and certainly the legal contract didn't include MS being required to support all existing hardware, no matter how old, indefinitey. No OS in history that I'm aware of does or ever has done that, and probably never will. So the issues are where MS draw that line, and what users with older hardware do about it?

It's no secret that I'm not MS's greatest fan over this. They lost my willing support over W8 but even I concede there comes a point where, if online, you either need to upgrade, or go offline, or accept increased risk and over further time, significantly increased risk.

So if MS support W10 for another four years ('til 2025) you can probably carry on for another, what, year or so after that with minimal increased risk profile, but then it'll get worse. But by that time, even my MS Surface Pro, a machine actually made by (or at least badged and sold by) MS themselves will be the best part of 10 years old and my concerns only apply if it still works, which judging by how hot the damn thing gets, is probably a bit doubtful.

However, assuming it (and another W10 system) can't be suitably upgraded, then my step is

4a) Remove that machine from any web access, and use something else, like a newer W11 system, to be my net-facing system, or

4b) Upgrade it to a secure OS that will run, i.e. probably a 2025 Linux system, and access the net that way.

I guess not many people will want to take their hardware off the net entirely, and while I'm more than content to do that if need be, anybody with one just system probably won't be. Which really leaves either a new PC, which may have been necessary by then anyway, or 4a).

My criticism of MS over this is more that some things (like locking the taskbar to the bottom) seem arbitrary and unnecessary, and that the way they've presented their plans seems very arrogant and high-handed. i.e. very poor PR. It's not so much about what they're doing (re: minimum spec) but the cack-handed and inept way they're doing it.

[Rubarb]

I honestly get the feeling Microsoft can find there own bottom using both hands at the moment.

Many people are just going to say sod this and move to linux, loads of people are just going to stick with windows 10 like people did with xp.
and the only way microsoft are going to make money is on the sales of new dells etc.

The way it stands only people that are going to be using windows 11 are new users and people that can aford to upgrade perfectly decent computers just to run it.

[kompukare]

I mean i get that Microsoft have turned their backs on the 'technically' minded people that helped make Windows what it is today because they want Windows to be an emotive experience like Apple but those 'technically' minded people, who i may add are often making the decisions on whether to use X software, want to know more than how lovely the experience is or that it's just going to make them more secure without any idea of how.

I think you've hit it on the head.
Marketing waffle almost taken from Jobs who in another life might have been the leader of a cult.

[LSG501]

IMO the biggest issue of the change of 'rules' (supposedly windows 10 had similar...) isn't the change but the simple fact that a large majority of people don't even know what tpm is let alone how to enable it etc.

So there are going to be a LOT of people who could upgrade and literally not know how to, of if what MS says about not sending to non eligible pc's, won't even know they can upgrade, which may in turn cause them to buy new hardware unnecessarily and cause a load of e-waste for no reason.

This is going to be a royal pita for those of us who are 'tech support' for friends and family.

[nobodyspecial]

So... "You won't be able to cheat the upgrade, particularly in organisations," implies they know its actually possible to cheat the upgrade, just not officially.

This therefore completely removes their arguement for the tight restriction being to improve security as its clearly going to put the hundreds of thousands with older hardware at risk when they stary googling how to install windows 11 on older hardware.

DING, DING...It's like your overweight bag at the airport. Sorry Mr, you can't put that on the plain, it's to heavy and could cause safety issues. Then just as you grab it to take it back they say, BUT... IF you have another $100 we can put it on the plane. Umm, so, if I give you another $100 you'll turn on some magic safety features making it OK to fly with my FAT BAG? Yep...So full of BS...Just a way to force an upgrade to an even WORSE OS, probably with another dozen Telemetry issues on top of the other 23x (or is it 28? something like, you can get an app to kill it all). No point in paying for this crap anymore. We need to all start moving to linux with an old 10/7 a dual boots just to do things MSFT blocks. Oh that bit is from a comedian almost verbatim so, props to Brando Vestal (see his comedy show).

[3dcandy]

The thing there is that the CPU used, other than perhaps an "Intel Inside" sticker, is utterly invisible to the average user. You just don't release a new OS for that. They could just stick the new scheduler on Windows 10, job done. I mean, they didn't bother with a version number shift when ARM support came in for Windows 10?

If they want to enforce secure boot, then that's a very visible step change because lots of existing hardware won't be able to update to it and the rolling Windows 10 train stops for some users. That's a situation that needs managing, and hence a narrative for upping the Windows version makes sense.

I think the mixed core handling is just something they threw in "while we are at it" to try and tempt people over with an improved performance. For consumers MS usually upgrade DIrectX and block installing on older OS versions to try and temp us over. They need to throw us some sort of bone or we won't play.

Again I'll say it.... they are saying they CAN'T just change the scheduler for mixed core use. Win 10 basically the whole OS doesn't work that way and to keep compatibility it just doesn't work.
The insider rings are full of the "why does it change everything" and it's because put simply it's almost a total rewrite of the core way Windows works. Just changing the scheduler results in mixed cores being dire. But emulated Win 10 works well I hear you say - well yes it does on say an M1 chip. But that has a host of transistors designed to accelerate x86 stuff, uses inbuilt dram etc. and runs under a VM. Win 11 runs natively on a mixed core system nicely without extra transistors etc. Windows ARM is not getting anywhere near the traction expected, for many reasons, but as hardware moves towards lower power consumption cores like ARM then Win 10 really doesn't cut the mustard. It took a huge rewrite of Android for example as in a total rewrite to support big.little and was done years ago thus them getting it right now, and it's no surprise that Apple have gone with a kernel that was written for their ARM based devices rather than the OSX kernel for the same reasons. ARM have done years of work to get it right for the end user. No Win 11 means the latest chips from Intel and AMD would perform poorly, and that would have been a bigger issue and driven many people away from Windows, many more than the new requirements of Win 11 and a short cutoff point hardware wise. MS had a real problem looming, they have perhaps not handled it right, but then again when have they. Same as Apple et al have handled things badly before (I remember the powerpc>x86 switch on macs and how bad it was with software that just flatly ran like a dog or crashed constantly and how people had 6 months old hardware that was obsolete overnight)

[The Hand]

Looks like I'm not getting it on my current system then with Raven Ridge APUs being Ryzen 1000 based, going by MS's current standards. Though might be building a new Zen 5 system in 2023 if it lives up to the hype.

[cheesemp]

The issue is too many are taken in by the current financials of MS,but Intel was doing well for years too before its issues surfaced. Lots of the rot set in during the good years due to hurbis.

I think you missed my comment - Microsoft do not make the real money from Windows anymore - Its Azure, office 365 and other services.

You also seem to want me to be a Microsoft apologist - I'm not - they are a business and will make decisions based on where they think they can make money. They must have analysed it and decided this was in THEIR best interest.

I also think you need to take into account that Microsoft themselves have started selling android device (The duo) and are adding support for Android apps - they know which way the consumer is going and are embracing it to make money from services.

Also everyone making the comment about why not make Window more enthusiast friendly (And configurable) - You can blame Apple for that - This is the way home OSes are going (Just look and lack of root for Android and efforts to prevent 3rd party app stores). It sucks but home users want a secure just works environment which is polar opposite of what we want.

(I work for a software house that used to make a lot of money chasing specialist desktop/server app sales - we've now mostly transitioned to cloud and Software as a Service - its where the real money is in this industry so I feel qualified to talk about this somewhat).

[DanceswithUnix]

Again I'll say it.... they are saying they CAN'T just change the scheduler for mixed core use. Win 10 basically the whole OS doesn't work that way and to keep compatibility it just doesn't work.

So, do a substantial rewrite and then slap a Windows 10 label on it. I never said it would be easy, I just said it didn't have to have the main label changed.

Heck, I've written schedulers, changes are seldom easy, but *from the viewpoint of a customer* it is just a level of performance not whether something works. And yes, without changes there are well documented reasons why mixed cores suck because the small cores drag down the latency of the large ones, which is also why phones usually implement the cores as a gear shift rather than ever using all at once. The customer doesn't know, or care. If they need to install the latest Windows 10 to have performance not suck, then that is a consistent message of the last who knows how many years to keep up to date if you want recent hardware to not suck.

Or put it another way... Windows 11 will have to work on existing CPU layouts. So that's SMP, SMT and NUMA support still baked in. That scheduler *must* work on all the machines I have in this house, or there will be modern machines it won't work with as well. It doesn't gate anything. But that business with the TPM? That's game over for several machines here. That's big, end of the road stuff that requires a big flag in the ground when explaining to the punters that not all machines will work with this. No upgrade available, you are on a different path, sorry.

I'm looking for something hard to explain to customers for why Windows 11 exists. That isn't a technical detail that most people will glaze over at, but it could be along for the ride at the same time to opportunistically bully people into using Windows 11 and being forced into things like using an MS login. MS have plenty of previous on that.