[zootboy]

> I don't even understand why Microsoft is forcing S0ix this hard

Because for whatever inexplicable reason, they've gotten it into their heads that laptops need to achieve feature parity with smartphones. Smartphones get to be always-on, so laptops apparently need to as well.

It's completely ridiculous, and I'm quite upset at Microsoft for continually trying to destroy the PC ecosystem in new and creative ways.

[brandnewaccount]

It's because smartphones are a goldmine of data sensors always collecting information on their users. Microsoft failed their attempts at making a phone catch on, but if they can get laptops to collect the same (or similar) data they could become very profitable products.

[sydney6]

Microsoft has a lot of insight about the Windows ecosystem works and crashes, and i'm even willing to believe that there's some sane technical reasoning behind all this. Perhaps the state of S3 is indeed this FUBAR, let's not forget, that MS cannot control the windows ecosystem like apple does with MacOS. MS has no/very little power over OEMs not conforming or only partly implementing standards, and yet has to deal with whatever hardware customers stick into their ~2 billion windows installations.

[yjftsjthsd-h]

> that MS cannot control the windows ecosystem like apple does with MacOS. MS has no/very little power over OEMs not conforming or only partly implementing standards,

I mean, we're discussing this because they are forcing S0ix; the question is whether this resulted in fewer buggy implementations, which I doubt.

[sydney6]

I doubt that too, without hesitation. But, i'm also not sure if the old way is indeed so much better. I left a comment above, describing some of the issues, apparently many, people have with suspend/resume and i wonder why MS is this strictly continuing this road. People may or may not like the new security mechanisms that windows 11 enforces, but they are there for a technical reason, reasonable or not may perhaps be a different question.

[mqus]

I get if they use those reasons to make S0 the default. But not making it configurable at all and even removing obscure commandline/registry options (instead of creating a switch which is just visibly disabled if you can't flip it due to missing S3 support) has no a technical justification.