This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
After using Windows for 30+ years now (since Windows 1), this is one of the straws finally pushing me into Linux.
I'm running 10, but without a TPM, can't go to 11. So sad. Not.
Honestly 7 was the last decent OS they made. In my opinion the good OS's were NT4 (game changer), 2000, XP, 7. They can keep the rest.
You can use the Rufus USB flashing tool with the Windows 11 iso and it will remove the TPM requirement and others.
Microsoft doesn't care about you upgrading your personal computer. they care about business licenses. Enterprise pays the bills, and enterprise computers have all had TPM for ages. I don't see any reason for them to make a change. consumers buying a new os for an existing computer is a drop in the bucket
Why? What benefit would Microsoft have in changing the requirements for Windows 11 when Windows 12 will more than likely be the OS they focus most of their resources on?
No chance.
Is anyone going to bring up the fact they told everyone 10 was the last version of windows. Then they launched 11 and are now talking about 12.
I know companies lie all the time, but we can at least call them out on it
No chance.
You concentrate on the TPM but ignore the CPU requirements...? If you have a CPU that is up to spec, you have a TPM - they're built in the CPU. Most people just need to turn it on in the BIOS (or update their BIOS as motherboard manufacturers have turned on the TPM as "Windows 11 support")
The truth of it is, every "jump" OS, i.e. 95, XP, 7, 10 has run really poorly on >5 year old chips at the time of launching. And MS got panned at "how slow" is was. But it was also the norm to update your PC more often. Now speed increases have slowed and Moore's Law has ended, it's about security and performance hit of said security. The truth is, the kernel hardening and malware protection and encryption built into 11 to make it far less likely to get infected than 10 and 7 means it needs the hardware support to do it. Without it, it runs far slower or is less secure. Neither anyone wants.
When 10 support ends in 2 years time, the lowest supported processor for 11 will be nearly 9 years old...
Damn, some sense around these parts. Always felt the TPM issue was overblown. Unless you wanted Win11 on day 1, and no sensible user should be doing that anyway!
https://lemmy.world/post/9205583
Here's why it's against Microsoft interest to drop TPM requirement. They will paywall updates for Windows 10. So, pay for software updates or pay for hardware updates.
Because there is no possible alternative /S
This is nothing new. Windows 10 will be 10 years old at that point. They’ve done paid extended service for several previous windows versions. I don’t like Windows or Microsoft. I run Linux or MacOS where I can but I can’t fault them for supporting an OS for 10 years.
Wow, so many salty replies to Linux or soon-to-be Linux users in that thread
Ha ha, no.
Chances are by Windows 12 they'll start implementing a check with their vendors to verify you're running windows and deny you any alternatives.
Windows 13 will melt your PC if you type the word Linux.
And Windows 14 will take you out to the woods and execute you if you even so much as think about a penguin.
Absolutely not. None of the arguments you said are even relevant for their business. If it was true they would do their best to reduce the requirements creep version to version.
Of course you can use Linux, but you made clear that you're uninformed about that in another post.
I've been running 11 on my 10 y/o PC without TPM 2 for a while and it's been working with zero issues. It's all just a money grabbing scheme to get people to upgrade their hardware.
