all 14 comments

[–]Bonn1770 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Joke's on them my old ass PC isn't up to spec for win 11.

[–]Clownfall 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The official system requirements are just plain silly, given the number of older but still more-than-decent CPUs are excluded.

If they want average home users to upgrade, they need to lower those requirements.

If they want power users to upgrade, they need to... fix the user experience so that using something like ExplorerPatcher isn't mandatory.

[–]cant_even 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If they want average home users to upgrade, they need to lower those requirements.

They DON'T WANT:

  1. Non-"TPM"
  2. Non 'Secure'-boot and non-EFI ('legacy') boot capability
  3. "Obsolete" CPUs without Intel Management Engine

...because it interferes with their back-door strategies.

The "general-purpose computer" is being turned into another 'smart-connected appliance'; a two-way Telescreen©1984.

[–]Clownfall 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah. They seemed to had backed down on that for a while after the failure of Win8/WinRT/Metro, giving us a decent Win10.

Hopefully history will repeat, and Win12 will give us decent-enough general purpose computing for another decade or so...

[–]Bonn1770 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

MS won't even allow the install even if I wanted it. Pure coincidence but I have an older PC I'm not using and just found my Win 8.1 install disc, I'm really tempted to install it.

[–]Myocarditis-Man[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It makes sense that Microsoft would start doing stuff like this again; since they did not get in any legal trouble for doing it the last time. Just like that time the American ISPs were caught paying third parties to flood the US government with comments supporting their business agenda. When the authorities see them or catch them in the act and still refuse to legally punish them, then it serves as tacit approval of what they are doing and a license for them to do it even more.

[–]chadwickofwv 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Pure fucking evil.

I expect nothing else from microsoft.

[–]Myocarditis-Man[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not a Windows user myself but if I was, I would expect them to start dialing it up gradually just like they did before; the only difference now, is that Microsoft has more than twice as long (before Windows 10 loses support) to toy with and torment users, by constantly redesigning the opt-out process to "increase conversions".

https://www.techdirt.com/2016/12/28/microsoft-finally-admits-malware-style-windows-10-upgrade-sales-pitch-went-too-far/

[–]agelmat 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Jokes on them. My PC is too old to upgrade

[–]LordoftheFlies 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Every fucking iteration of Windows, they do this shit. As soon as the current version gets settled, the most glaring hole are patched shut, and people are finally happy using it (mostly, anyway), here comes the new version to revert everything back to 0, but with a new (and higher) price tag.

[–]brimshae 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That reminds me, I need to see which of my games are Linux\Proton compatible.

Teamspeak exists for Linux, right? *click* *click* *click* Yes.

[–]chadwickofwv 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The vast majority of games will run on Steam Play, aka Proton. The only area you run into problems is anti-cheat software, and that's usually just the developer refusing to click a single checkbox.

[–]DerpDerp3001 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

[–]DerpDerp3001 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Darn, it's private.