Given that Apple is going to "11", of course Microsoft is going to follow.
I can only wonder what they will use this as an excuse to bork or take away from us this time. Not that I really want to know. It would probably be safer for me to just keep typing away on Windows 95 and XP.
Apple already went to 11. The new release that's coming out is going to be 12 it looks like. As for Windows... There was rumor at one point of them just dropping the number and just calling it Windows. I could definitely see them doing that since they're really using the YYHx format for their version numbers anyway.
I took it for a test drive yesterday. I know it's still a development release and things could change before it debuts, but it seems to be Windows 10 with some UI changes. It even accepts Windows 10 licenses. The centered taskbar buttons can be changed so that they are on the left, but I didn't see a way to make the taskbar smaller, like I prefer it to be. There was also no way to enable proper labels for running applications - it only shows the icons. I'm hoping they bring back these features in a later build.
Other than the visual refreshes, so far it's very much just Windows 10. You STILL have to keep it disconnected from the Internet when you set it up, otherwise it will force you into creating a Microsoft account to use it.
You STILL have to keep it disconnected from the Internet when you set it up, otherwise it will force you into creating a Microsoft account to use it.
No, you don't. That's not the case with Windows 10 and it doesn't look like that's the case with Windows 11 either:
It all certainly looks more plausible, but Microsoft has a history of making big UI changes with developer builds that wind up getting reverted. So I'll try to reserve final judgement until we get an actual release.
It's certainly possible that it's a fake. But I don't think anyone believed them when they claimed windows 10 would be the last. They might decide to drop numbers from the name and go with either just windows or windows next. We'll just have to wait and see what they announce on the 24th.
All of the files from the leak have a date of May 30, plus they're all signed by Microsoft, and Microsoft isn't exactly popular for leaking fake Windows ISOs.
As long as that won't be nagware like for the 10 upgrade, and that the new version itself won't be a trainwreck upon first release, then I'm cool with it.
Hopefully Windows 11 gets rid of most of the regressions of Windows 10 (e.g. unwanted advertisements - namely the monthly Microsoft Account ads for users of local accounts and the MS Edge ads that show up if you use an alternate web browser). Otherwise, I'm switching to Linux by 2023 when Windows 8.1 (the last tolerable Windows version for me) ends support.
I've been using it for the past two days, and it's been fine for me. In my experience it's been a bit faster than Windows 10 on the same system (R7 2700, 16GB DDR4, RX 570). Definitely looking forward to the final release.
I do have my doubts about this being unintentional though, especially given some of the things Microsoft has done recently.
Huh, copying Apple again I see? Even how the taskbar looks gives me that impression... but the whole thing looks nice I must admit, and it's clear that Microsoft have learnt the lessons from Windows 10 (well, so far).
Here's a good one: If your CPU is 3 years old or older, it does not "support" Windows 11. Despite the CPU instruction requirements showing that any Intel CPU made past 2008 and any AMD made past 2012 can in fact run it.
No doubt a money-grabbing situation by Microsoft, AMD/TSMC and Intel.
So basically, as of now, no Windows 7 or 8.1 user will be getting this "free upgrade" as the last CPU that "supported" Windows 7 and 8.X was Skylake. Which is "too old" for Windows 11.
Yea, and that whole TPM requirement reeks. Windows 10 only required it for bitlocker (and bitlocker actually could still be used without although you had to jump through hoops)
The more I read about Windows "11", the more sick I get.
This will also be used as an excuse to axe support for applications still compatible with Windows 7.
Reportedly Windows 11 will drop the 32-bit version, which probably means all new computer will drop support for BIOS booting. (The last shred of IBM PC compatibility).
Actually, Intel already ordered the complete removal of CSM/Bios compatibility from all new Intel PCs by 2020. I assume AMD followed suit. That time has already passed.
The trend of operating systems requiring certain functionality from CPUs and thus requiring newer processors to install newer operating systems is far from anything new. Plenty of the vintage OS's this site hosts and people fawn over have established new CPU requirements over what came previously.
So I really don't understand the uproar about Windows 11 doing the same. The CPU's and features it requires seem to all be things that have been available for a few years now.
OS's and hardware are meant to work together. Don't try to shoe-horn in the bleeding edge OS on ancient hardware. That was half the reason Vista got such a bad rep.
The TPM requirement does seem a bit odd. Why would it be needed if you weren't doing bitlocker? But then, it can also be used for other things. Windows Hello is the first example that comes to mind. But any system made in the last 5 years should have no trouble supporting that. The trouble is that it's usually disabled by default and it's sometimes buried several layers deep in the UEFI menu options.
I just enabled it on my main desktop and I had to dig around the menus for a bit to find it. Which was thankfully made at least slightly easier by the fact that AMD calls their firmware TPM, fTPM which makes it more obvious what it is whereas Intel calls it PTT (Platform Trust Technology).
And just why is this disabled by default anyway? Is there any disadvantage to having TPM enabled if you're not using it? Because I just don't get why this is the default. I guess it'll start changing now that Windows 11 is requiring it.
The OSes on this site usually came along with genuine major hardware improvements. Want to install Windows 95? Yea, you are going to need to upgrade that 386SX to a pentium. What are you going to lose? Not much. You can still boot PC-DOS 1.0 on that pentium if you want. All but a couple of speed sensitive DOS programs will still work fine. And now you can have multiple spreadsheets, databases, word processors, and even that new fangled Netscape thing open at the same time as well as use built in printer and file sharing.
In contrast, the machines made over the last 15 years are so are all about the same. Unless you are a gamer, you probably couldn't even tell the difference. There is no good reason to throw everything away and buy all new stuff. Add to that, slowly they are taking things away, locking things down, turning computers in to oversized cell phones.
Definitely not the same as 15 years ago. 15 year old CPUs are terribly slow compared to their modern counterparts. 10 year old CPUs? Yeah, they're still pretty usable, but definitely not the same as a modern CPU. Having recently upgraded to a Ryzen 7 3700x from an FX 8350, I can tell you, you can feel the performance difference in everything, not just games. Plus there's the security issues that have been discovered (spectre, meltdown, etc) in recent times.
Still doesn't change that fact you have perfectly good computers that can still even play many new games at 1080p being turned into e-waste by these retarded system requirements. Hell, Microsoft most expensive computer is e-waste as well because it came with a 7th gen intel and thus won't be supported by Windows 11. And before anybody says "BUT LINUX", most people don't know linux exists and will throw their computers out.
Windows 11 build 21996.1 is not a burden on my Xeon X5670 with a Quadro FX 3800. 11 year old CPU with a 12 year old GPU. So this is still ridiculous. Newer 7.x versions of IDA are faster than earlier ones, so I don't see what's holding me back.
I don't see anything that is taking advantage of AVX, AVX2 or whatever IPC improvements (still have the multithreaded advantage at up to 24 threads) since then that I could use.
And why is MS Defender AV treated as such a crown jewel in 21996? It's so hard to remove it or change the permissions on its folder in Program Files, while it's easy to change the permissions and modify ntoskrnl and all other system files.
And before anybody says "BUT LINUX", most people don't know linux exists and will throw their computers out.
Yes, most people don't care enough to even know what windows 11 is and they certainly aren't going to install it unless it comes to them automatically. Windows 10 is still supported until 2025 and I'm sure it will still be good for a few years after that. By which point any system that was too old to run 11 but still ran 10 would need to be retired anyway. And yes, regular users would throw it out and buy a new one. If they still need a computer.
E-waste is certainly a problem, but I'm not sure if holding back technology is the answer. Probably better to encourage recycling it.
It does not deny the fact that Windows 11 requires instructions that have been available on all x86-64 cpus for almost a decade. They added a pointless "generation requirement" that forbids anything older than 3 years. Which means 7 years of processors that *can* run it are forbidden. In addition, they tacked on a DX12/WDDM2.0 requirement. Not a problem for desktops, Nvidia's gpus down to a decade old support this. Amd, maybe the last 6 years. But laptops, no. In addition, what is DWM going to do that requires all these advanced hardware features? Ray-trace windows? Seriously, a desktop compositor should be fast and simple. Not be a complete game engine. And for what, the same flatness and "ooh new rounded windows!" I can't seem to pick out any enhancement DWM would possibly need that it needs an advanced GPU. TPM? I have no opinion other than I don't do "trusted" computing. These factors combined grant one the reasonable viewpoint that Microsoft, coupled with hardware vendors, are purposefully obsoleting perfectly capable hardware. Which also grants one the reasonable viewpoint that technology has stalled. It's getting smaller, but not much more powerful. The fact a 2008 Core2Duo could actually run Windows 11 (they just declare it "too old"), shows that. Except the bloating of cpu instruction sets to try and handle every single thing possible.
>The fact a 2008 Core2Duo could actually run Windows 11 (they just declare it "too old"), shows that. Except the bloating of cpu instruction sets to try and handle every single thing possible.
It can run it, but I had to deal with C2D systems without an SSD (and even one with an SSD) running Windows 10 at work, and I can tell you it's a pain to use daily for just about anything, even basic office work. Why it's so ungodly slow is a different debate, but fact remains that even though yeah you can technically run Win10 on such machines, in all honesty you probably shouldn't and should instead start looking for either an alternative secure OS that runs better, or a hardware upgrade.
I think after 13 years, a hardware upgrade is justifiable, though some of the new Win11 requirements really are unnecessary.
@DeFacto Later C2D machines (E8400-E8600 come to mind) run Windows 10 decently well with a good SSD. I could definitely see why people would want to run Windows 11 on them.
I'm beginning to think perhaps we should all switch to ARM based desktops or something (actual CPU would become irrelevant), let Microsoft continue writing for x64, and then just run Windows in an emulator, so Microsoft can add whatever absurd hardware requirements, and all we have to do is update the emulator.
Comments
I can only wonder what they will use this as an excuse to bork or take away from us this time. Not that I really want to know. It would probably be safer for me to just keep typing away on Windows 95 and XP.
As for Windows... There was rumor at one point of them just dropping the number and just calling it Windows. I could definitely see them doing that since they're really using the YYHx format for their version numbers anyway.
So far, it looks nice... and you don't see Candy Crush or any advertising on the Start Menu whatsoever.
Other than the visual refreshes, so far it's very much just Windows 10. You STILL have to keep it disconnected from the Internet when you set it up, otherwise it will force you into creating a Microsoft account to use it.
No, you don't. That's not the case with Windows 10 and it doesn't look like that's the case with Windows 11 either:
It all certainly looks more plausible, but Microsoft has a history of making big UI changes with developer builds that wind up getting reverted. So I'll try to reserve final judgement until we get an actual release.
They might decide to drop numbers from the name and go with either just windows or windows next. We'll just have to wait and see what they announce on the 24th.
As long as that won't be nagware like for the 10 upgrade, and that the new version itself won't be a trainwreck upon first release, then I'm cool with it.
I do have my doubts about this being unintentional though, especially given some of the things Microsoft has done recently.
https://www.cnet.com/news/windows-11-is-here-with-a-more-mac-like-look-and-new-features/
I guess we can don the tin foil and subscribe to the theory that they leaked it on purpose.
Huh, copying Apple again I see? Even how the taskbar looks gives me that impression... but the whole thing looks nice I must admit, and it's clear that Microsoft have learnt the lessons from Windows 10 (well, so far).
If your CPU is 3 years old or older, it does not "support" Windows 11.
Despite the CPU instruction requirements showing that any Intel CPU made past 2008 and any AMD made past 2012 can in fact run it.
No doubt a money-grabbing situation by Microsoft, AMD/TSMC and Intel.
So basically, as of now, no Windows 7 or 8.1 user will be getting this "free upgrade" as the last CPU that "supported" Windows 7 and 8.X was Skylake. Which is "too old" for Windows 11.
The more I read about Windows "11", the more sick I get.
This will also be used as an excuse to axe support for applications still compatible with Windows 7.
Reportedly Windows 11 will drop the 32-bit version, which probably means all new computer will drop support for BIOS booting. (The last shred of IBM PC compatibility).
That time has already passed.
So I really don't understand the uproar about Windows 11 doing the same. The CPU's and features it requires seem to all be things that have been available for a few years now.
OS's and hardware are meant to work together. Don't try to shoe-horn in the bleeding edge OS on ancient hardware. That was half the reason Vista got such a bad rep.
The TPM requirement does seem a bit odd. Why would it be needed if you weren't doing bitlocker? But then, it can also be used for other things. Windows Hello is the first example that comes to mind. But any system made in the last 5 years should have no trouble supporting that. The trouble is that it's usually disabled by default and it's sometimes buried several layers deep in the UEFI menu options.
I just enabled it on my main desktop and I had to dig around the menus for a bit to find it. Which was thankfully made at least slightly easier by the fact that AMD calls their firmware TPM, fTPM which makes it more obvious what it is whereas Intel calls it PTT (Platform Trust Technology).
And just why is this disabled by default anyway? Is there any disadvantage to having TPM enabled if you're not using it? Because I just don't get why this is the default. I guess it'll start changing now that Windows 11 is requiring it.
In contrast, the machines made over the last 15 years are so are all about the same. Unless you are a gamer, you probably couldn't even tell the difference. There is no good reason to throw everything away and buy all new stuff. Add to that, slowly they are taking things away, locking things down, turning computers in to oversized cell phones.
I don't see anything that is taking advantage of AVX, AVX2 or whatever IPC improvements (still have the multithreaded advantage at up to 24 threads) since then that I could use.
And why is MS Defender AV treated as such a crown jewel in 21996? It's so hard to remove it or change the permissions on its folder in Program Files, while it's easy to change the permissions and modify ntoskrnl and all other system files.
Yes, most people don't care enough to even know what windows 11 is and they certainly aren't going to install it unless it comes to them automatically. Windows 10 is still supported until 2025 and I'm sure it will still be good for a few years after that. By which point any system that was too old to run 11 but still ran 10 would need to be retired anyway. And yes, regular users would throw it out and buy a new one. If they still need a computer.
E-waste is certainly a problem, but I'm not sure if holding back technology is the answer. Probably better to encourage recycling it.
In addition, they tacked on a DX12/WDDM2.0 requirement. Not a problem for desktops, Nvidia's gpus down to a decade old support this. Amd, maybe the last 6 years. But laptops, no. In addition, what is DWM going to do that requires all these advanced hardware features? Ray-trace windows? Seriously, a desktop compositor should be fast and simple. Not be a complete game engine. And for what, the same flatness and "ooh new rounded windows!" I can't seem to pick out any enhancement DWM would possibly need that it needs an advanced GPU.
TPM? I have no opinion other than I don't do "trusted" computing.
These factors combined grant one the reasonable viewpoint that Microsoft, coupled with hardware vendors, are purposefully obsoleting perfectly capable hardware. Which also grants one the reasonable viewpoint that technology has stalled. It's getting smaller, but not much more powerful. The fact a 2008 Core2Duo could actually run Windows 11 (they just declare it "too old"), shows that. Except the bloating of cpu instruction sets to try and handle every single thing possible.
It can run it, but I had to deal with C2D systems without an SSD (and even one with an SSD) running Windows 10 at work, and I can tell you it's a pain to use daily for just about anything, even basic office work. Why it's so ungodly slow is a different debate, but fact remains that even though yeah you can technically run Win10 on such machines, in all honesty you probably shouldn't and should instead start looking for either an alternative secure OS that runs better, or a hardware upgrade.
I think after 13 years, a hardware upgrade is justifiable, though some of the new Win11 requirements really are unnecessary.
I'm beginning to think perhaps we should all switch to ARM based desktops or something (actual CPU would become irrelevant), let Microsoft continue writing for x64, and then just run Windows in an emulator, so Microsoft can add whatever absurd hardware requirements, and all we have to do is update the emulator.