[benbristow]

I don't think Microsoft would want to make that same mistake again. I would expect Microsoft start pushing Windows 11 automatically through Windows Update for anyone on Windows 10, or at least start pushing heavily through popups/notifications to start the update like they did with Windows 10.

[least]

That wouldn’t work if the person’s computer doesn’t support Windows 11, though, which is the entire argument the blog post is making. That because windows 11 won’t work people will just throw away their computers and create more electronic waste.

[agumonkey]

"computer locked, you need to buy a new one to keep enjoying our stuff"

[npteljes]

I think at the end of the day, they are happier with an illegitimate Windows user, than a non-Windows user. They'll nag, push, try everything to annoy, but they won't lock you out completely, because that could mean losing you for good.

Of course, I can only infer this from their past behavior.

[otterley]

Microsoft isn’t going to do that.

[userbinator]

...yet.

Remember all the talk about "Windows as a service"?

Given what's happened so far, I fully expect them to try something like that at some point. "We only offer subscriptions of the latest version, and your current hardware doesn't meet our minimum requirements, so you'll have to replace it to continue using Windows." Maybe it'll trigger a mass exodus to Linux --- or perhaps more likely, back to older and cracked pre-subscription versions of Windows.

[pmontra]

> "Windows as a service"

A computer able to run only a RDP client able to connect only to a Windows VM licensed to you, running on Azure with every autoupdate turned on /s

[dvfjsdhgfv]

A similar scenario is not impossible. Somehow it has become acceptable to use a always-online workflows. There are complete lines of products that won't work at all if you're not online, and some will switch off after a certain time (like Adobe). There is an enormous push in that direction from all industries. People give in without any resistance. It's become normal and acceptable that pieces of code on all your devices connect to different services and send data you have no idea about. If an app stops working because you lose the internet connection, somehow it's not the problem of the app but yours. So I can imagine a scenario similar to the one you describe in a decade or two.

[romwell]

Soooo, the people who can't install Windows 11 will continue to not care?

I don't understand the logic of your response. It's not like Microsoft will brick machines not eligible for Win 11

[numpad0]

By cutting off at 8th Gen and TPM 1.2+2.0, they’re cutting off a lot of current and high end systems built by enthusiasts, while supporting far slower and inferior PCs.

That’s the problem. No one’s arguing they’re chasing off cheap Celeron, they’re trying to get rid of even some Threadrippers and multi-socket setups, that could have 128GB or more of RAM, for “performance”.

[tremon]

So, what's in those generations that might actually matter to Microsoft? As you say, it's unlikely to be about performance. Is it some instruction set, or feature flags? It's unlikely to be about virtualization capabilities, as Intel still happily sells the newest chips "differentiated" to be virtually challenged. Did those generations introduce some crypto algorithm/primitive that Microsoft doesn't want to go without? A new system management mode? On-die microphone?

[numpad0]

Intel sales is desperate to stop brand loyalty vanishing, processors losing relevance, while Microsoft is trying to recuperate costs on cancelled Windows 10X code. Those are suspicions I have.

The “only the latest Intel enable $use_case” cliche is their default marketing narrative. Microsoft or AMD or NVIDIA normally don’t do that.

[majewsky]

> they’re cutting off a lot of current and high end systems built by enthusiasts, while supporting far slower and inferior PCs.

No they don't. All those systems may not have hardware TPM, but they support firmware TPM, which is enough to check the checkbox.

[IshKebab]

They will drop support in 4 years though (or so they say) which is very short notice for desktops OSes.

[tempestn]

I'm going to confidently predict right now that there's no way security updates for Windows 10 will cease in 2025.

[wmf]

We're talking about computers that (officially) cannot run Windows 11. Obviously they won't be auto-upgraded.

[benbristow]

I'm sure they'll loosen the restriction of having TPM enabled. That seems to be the only limiting factor.

Or they could perhaps find a way to build a piece of software that will enable it automatically...

[vetinari]

> I'm sure they'll loosen the restriction of having TPM enabled. That seems to be the only limiting factor.

They've added restrictions since: 8th gen Intel Core or 2nd gen AMD Zen required.

[floatboth]

That's just some list in the documentation, mostly intended for OEMs building new computers with pre-installed Windows.

NO WAY there will be literal cpuid checks excluding earlier processors.

[vetinari]

This is not the Windows Logo program, which is intended for OEMs.

There do not need to be any CPUID checks to exclude processors; just a random update will not work and Microsoft will shrug it off, well, that CPU is not on the supported list anyway.

[Teever]

So what is the point of a restriction that they will later loosen?

[mdoms]

So your issue is that MS will force the upgrade onto machines they have explicitly said can't be upgraded? Is that really your concern?

[Sebb767]

> I don't think Microsoft would want to make that same mistake again.

The mistake of not pushing it? I still remember the uproar when people needed to Google how to say "no" to the upgrade dialog - if it did not simply install without asking, that is. I honestly can't see how they would push Windows 11 any harder.