[mulletbum]

I don't understand how that is artificial obsolescence. Micrsoft does not want to continue to pay for the programming talent to keep Win10 going. They have set a date to stop doing it. You are welcome to use those computers till they die, you can even use them with Win10. Your computers will just not be patched and secure.

Even more so, if you want them patched and secure, you can move to Linux. Nothing about Windows stops the hardware from working with another operating system.

Artificial obsolescence is when an Apple Device stops being patched and they put weird battery hacks in that confuse users into buying new devices.

[hammyhavoc]

> Nothing about Windows stops the hardware from working with another operating system

So, a Universal Audio UAD-2 DSP accelerator card now magically works on Linux along with the entire software ecosystem built on top of it? That's disingenuous to say the least.

[alexjplant]

A fraction of a percentage of Windows users do music production. A single-digit percentage (at best, probably more like another fraction) of them use UAD hardware. What the parent post said is, actually, applicable in the simple majority of cases. Buying expensive bespoke DSP hardware tied to a digital interface and platform wasn't a wise choice if you value longevity; digital recording has been around long enough to see these things come and go so that's kind of on you.

*EDIT for posterity: I'd like to note the lack of absolutisms or personal defamations in this post (contrary to what has been described below).

[hammyhavoc]

And? The point still stands: what was said simply isn't true, and this is why people come away dissatisfied by desktop Linux, because the people who say x are wrong.

I say this as a Fedora user, and people say it's never had any problems, yet Fedora 35 broke TimeShift for all users. Linux on servers? Great. Linux on desktops? Be honest with people about what the limitations are rather than talking in broad strokes. It's flakey. It's better than it used to be, but it's flakey.

Bold of you to assume I bought one or use one and to attack me for it. Speaks volumes and isn't in the spirit of the HN guidelines, but is absolutely par for the course for HN, and absolutely the typical Linux fanboy retort. By your same logic, people bought an "expensive" OS in the form of Windows 10, which is the topic of discussion.

Furthermore, "expensive" is relative. The accelerator is far cheaper than buying all the pieces of hardware it models in DSP. As tools go, it's cheap in terms of actionable value and resale value.

Linux has its place. It isn't for everybody. Stop pretending it is appropriate for the "majority" of cases when we are talking about people staying on Windows 10 for specific reasons who are likely power users with specific needs in the first place.

Shall we discuss the woeful state of compatibility of Linux with modern laptops where some but not all features work or they don't work well or they don't work consistently? I bought a ThinkPad to get a decent laptop experience with Linux. Even with that said, the dock connector doesn't work, that's a big selling point of buying a ThinkPad.

The reality is that Windows and macOS suits most people better than Linux because their software and hardware works today. Why switch to Linux and get less functionality out of your existing setup?

[nazgulsenpai]

LTSC is going to be supported until 2027. So they literally are going to be paying for the security update development anyway, but normal users just won't be able to get them.

[WorldMaker]

Also, allegedly one of the points of the switch of a lot of Windows 10 to more of a service model was that a lot of things like security patches should in theory be shareable between Windows 11 and Windows 10 and should be updateable even without big "feature updates".

Some of it does raise the question how much Windows 11 is an artificial compatibility break with Windows 10 (which again, is mostly brought here because this is after they once said they didn't expect to do that again) and how much they were either wrong about the service model in the early Windows 10 days versus how much they are getting paid by PC OEMs to sell new computers and "force" hardware upgrades at a "regular cadence again".