Why is everyone so mad about Windows 11?
Why is everyone so mad about Windows 11?
This. Plus they act like there is some fundamental right to always be able to run the latest state-of-the-art stuff on every hardware imaginable. Even the 8700k is from 2017. That's almost 4 years old at this moment already. By the time Windows 10 is EOL the minimum supported hardware will be 8 years old. It's time to be realistic and accept that the 2700k (random example) simply already was and now definitely is ancienct tech.
While this is all true, Microsoft right now is selling a computer that starts at $3,500 that won't be able to be upgraded to Windows 11. Imagine dropping that much on a brand new computer and then learning that the new OS from the same manufacturer isn't compatible with it. This also shows how disconnected departments at Microsoft are. The OS team and the hardware team apparently aren't on the same page, and there's no evidence that a newer model of the Studio will be out this year (and the chip shortage probably killed those plans if there were any), yet Microsoft will happily sell you an outdated computer according to their Windows 11 requirements. Things like this are the issue I have with how Microsoft has handled the announcement of Windows 11. It's been nothing but pr blunder after pr blunder. The actual os is pretty damn good. I'm running it on a 6th gen I7 6700HQ ThinkPad P50 and I like it, just sucks that I more then likely won't be able to run the final build if the requirements hold, and I don't have the money to replace my laptop with a newer one just to upgrade the operating system.
They're evaluating the possibility of extending support to newer Intel and older Ryzen models based on recent Insider build data, though it seems unlikely to move much further. Many people overlook that this decision isn't just about compatibility—it's about establishing a standard for future updates. Every minimum spec you choose acts as a reference point, ensuring stability over time. While the exact boundaries may feel flexible, setting them is essential to maintain consistent support and feature rollouts. As Windows evolves, updates arrive yearly rather than all at once, allowing them to adjust requirements as needed.
I get that 10 is supported till 2025 but I have always kept my systems running for 10 years or more because they simply were still totally usable for a lot of purposes. I know dislike that the current i7 2600 gaming media living room tv system is going to be useless in 4 years in windows whilst it will just like it has always done stream media just fine still. The old core 2 quad could with a newer gpu so there is no reason this one shouldn't be able too. Hell people have 5 year old devices that are basically for the bin once 10 goes out and we all know how much microsoft loves fixing their older os's (the answer is not just bare minimum support and standard security updates). So I hope 11 turns into the biggest baddest dumpster fire for them they have ever seen and that people break that stupid stuff asap. Also I'm super salty because a bunch of nucs we have do not meet the tpm requirement and about half cannot be added on to. These range from 5th gen to 7th gen intel cpu's and at work they don't do a hardware refresh it works till it no longer does so yes we still have core 2 duo machines around that are actually totally fine to use and plenty fast for their purposes but once 11 becomes the only windows os we'll have to toss A LOT of totally fine functional computers. So yeah that is why I dislike it. Also the reason it works for you now is because it's the beta and it's a lot less locked down than the final release will be.
Sure, I can help with that. Let me know if you want it more concise or adjusted further.
Often people focus on the operating system rather than its requirements. Usually they're surprised by the specifics, but I wasn't too shocked. By the time Windows 10 hits the end of its life, most PCs can't run it anymore. These machines won’t have an Apple logo and will likely be outdated and worn out. I remember a friend who used to work at a Dutch forensic institute. They once had a Mac, but it was years ago. The hardware was outdated, and some internal issues made it a costly relic—around $8,000. Not many systems make it through like this. When online safety becomes a concern, people might start worrying more. What a hassle when something just falls apart! What really bothered me is why they set the generation limit at that point. It seems they moved back already, but it still feels unfair. Windows 11 doesn’t seem like a big deal to me, honestly. It feels a bit forced. I’m sure there’s a valid reason for this, but I’d rather not speculate if I already understood the issue.
Well, apparently those who keep pushing you are the same folks still using XP... Excuse me! Newbie. I didn’t even see the subforum. Thanks!