DosFreak wrote on 2021-06-25, 19:11:

Lots of Windows 10 systems will be "Retro" when Windows 11 is released. 32bit and TPM.

The TPM requirement in particular means lots of cheap Linux capable x86-64 hardware on the market in coming years .

Anything 32-bit only CPU is likely either hopeless too old for most modern uses, a slow SOC on an entry-level ultra-mobile device or more often than not both .

darry wrote on 2021-06-25, 19:57:

Anything 32-bit only CPU is likely either hopeless too old for most modern uses, a slow SOC on an entry-level ultra-mobile device or more often than not both .

You can install a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit CPU, you know.

64-bit means P4F needed (2004)
TPM means core 8000 needed (2016)

WDStudios wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:03:

darry wrote on 2021-06-25, 19:57:

Anything 32-bit only CPU is likely either hopeless too old for most modern uses, a slow SOC on an entry-level ultra-mobile device or more often than not both .

You can install a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit CPU, you know.

I do know that, but you can't install a growing number of Linux distros on 32-bit only CPUs.

What I meant to say was that any system discarded/sold off because It has a 32-bit only CPU and thus can't be upgraded from Windows 10 to Windows 11 will likely be old and slow enough to not be worthwhile for most modern uses even under Linux .

I was not referring to 32-bit Windows 10 running on 64-bit capable hardware ( that may be Windows 11 capable) on which people have chosen to run a 32-bit OS for whatever reason/need ( need for NTVDM, most likely).

robertmo wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:05:

64-bit means P4F needed (2004)
TPM means core 8000 needed (2016)

There may be other as of yet undisclosed CPU instruction requirements as Microsoft almost certainly did not plan for or test early 64-bit platforms that were never shipped with UEFI/secure boot.

Apparently TPM 1.2 will work but will not be officially supported, or something around those lines .

WDStudios wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:03:

darry wrote on 2021-06-25, 19:57:

Anything 32-bit only CPU is likely either hopeless too old for most modern uses, a slow SOC on an entry-level ultra-mobile device or more often than not both .

You can install a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit CPU, you know.

Slightly off-topic, but this reminds me of Windows 3.1x and the AMD Athlon 64 processor.
Originally, I heard, there was some major compatibility issue with 386 Enhanced Mode.

However, I think I haven't experienced this myself so far and I can't find information about it online. Hm.
Interestingly also, in VMs, with AMD-V enabled, 386 Enhanced Mode worked fine on our old Athlon 64 X2 (3800 ?) PC.

Edit: Typo fixed.

So this is what happens when you mate a horse and a donkey... nice centralised Dock you've got there Microsoft!

Anyway, looks like x58 is reaching the end of its Windows road unless Opencore and/or Clover can manage to provide UEFI Secure Boot functionality (and there is a TPM module on the motherboard).

Correct me if I am wrong, but Windows 11 will not run 32 bit apps?

Waiting for an avalanche of complaints then. I heard a lot about this when macOS Catalina dropped it and users wanting to run them had to be stuck with macOS Mojave. My dad is the most hypocritical here - Complained about it, but when he learns that Windows 11 will do the same, his reply was “at least they gave a 20 years window to migrate” not sure if he was being ironic/sarcastic or seriously thinking it was a good thing (20 yrs) *facepalm*

MotoPete wrote on 2021-06-25, 22:18:

So this is what happens when you mate a horse and a donkey... nice centralised Dock you've got there Microsoft!

There is a switch to put it back on left

Nope don't get too excited. It's just the 32bit build of Windows will be dropped.
If MS dropped 32bit application support then market share would drop considerably and tons of people would stick it out with <Windows 11.

It's interesting that all you read about with the TPM requirement is if your computer will have it or not, not any of the other potential uses MS will use it for (If it's just for security of the device that the person "owns" then fine but for anything else not fine), expect everyone to roll over for the new shiny.
Mabye it can be disabled after the install?

Mabye if MS was legally required to stick to just this then it would be fine as a requirement:
https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2021/ … ip-to-the-cloud

Except for....

Out of the box support for Microsoft Azure Attestation enables Windows 11 to provide evidence of trust via attestation, which forms the basis of compliance policies organizations can depend upon to develop an understanding of their true security posture. These Azure Attestation-backed compliance policies validate both the identity, as well as the platform, and form the backbone for the Zero Trust and Conditional Access workflows for safeguarding corporate resources.

Yes I know. Implied just for usage for work laptops or possibly BYOD but you know what I mean.

robertmo wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:05:

64-bit means P4F needed (2004)
TPM means core 8000 needed (2016)

Wait, what? TPM has been around a lot longer than that. Even the Dell Latitude laptops and desktops that came with 2nd gen Core-I CPUs had the option of having a TPM chip.

Pretty sure my X79 (3-4th gen) and X99 (5th - 6th gen) motherboards have TPM chips.

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:43:

robertmo wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:05:

64-bit means P4F needed (2004)
TPM means core 8000 needed (2016)

Wait, what? TPM has been around a lot longer than that. Even the Dell Latitude laptops and desktops that came with 2nd gen Core-I CPUs had the option of having a TPM chip.

Pretty sure my X79 (3-4th gen) and X99 (5th - 6th gen) motherboards have TPM chips.

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK.

As for version, Windows 11 tolerates 1.2, but strongly prefers 2.0. About 10 years separate them .

See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module

darry wrote on 2021-06-25, 18:55:

Another reason to get the Pro version […]
Show full quote

Another reason to get the Pro version

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/what … 11-requirements

Copy code to clipboard

1  Internet connection: Internet connectivity is necessary to perform updates, and to download and use some features.Windows 11 Home edition requires an Internet connection and a Microsoft Account to complete device setup on first use.  

GOOD! The general populace that will click on absolutely anything and that doesn't know how to actually operate safely on the Internet should be forced to install updates when connected to the Internet.

The having to have an MS account is not a bad thing either. It makes it so the license is tied to your account and also lets you move the license to a new computer and/or reactivate the license very easily if too much hardware changes on your computer. You simply go to the activation troubleshooter, it asks you why you need to reactive and then you choose the name of machine you want to reactive on your account (has a list of computers on your account) and you select the correct one and it reactivates.

No more having to call MS or do the reactivation of text / a link, etc.

darry wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:51:

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK. […]
Show full quote

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:43:

robertmo wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:05:

64-bit means P4F needed (2004)
TPM means core 8000 needed (2016)

Wait, what? TPM has been around a lot longer than that. Even the Dell Latitude laptops and desktops that came with 2nd gen Core-I CPUs had the option of having a TPM chip.

Pretty sure my X79 (3-4th gen) and X99 (5th - 6th gen) motherboards have TPM chips.

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK.

As for version, Windows 11 tolerates 1.2, but strongly prefers 2.0. About 10 years separate them .

See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module

Well, if it works with 1.2, then it works.

As for 2.0 at least for the Dell laptops that shipped with 1.2 and supported an update to 2.0, it was a huge mess as it didn't work a lot of the time and the computers would have to be reverted back to 1.2.

There was a series of laptops that had major issues with the TPM chips. One of the recommended fixes was to upgrade to the 2.0 firmware. It never worked for us. Not even once.
Almost 100% of the time the motherboard was replaced under warranty. There were a couple that started working again after removing the battery, draining any residual power, waiting for a while and then putting it all back together.

This is the Vista situation all over again.

To be really honest here, I have never used Secure Boot or UEFI Boot in my life. I've always used legacy boot with PCs before I kicked them out of my house and moved to a Mac.

Having to enable Secure Boot is a major blow for those who want to dual boot with Linux. AFAIK they will only be able to dual boot with latest Ubuntu.

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:52:

GOOD! The general populace that will click on absolutely anything and that doesn't know how to actually operate safely on the In […]
Show full quote

darry wrote on 2021-06-25, 18:55:

Another reason to get the Pro version […]
Show full quote

Another reason to get the Pro version

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/what … 11-requirements

Copy code to clipboard

1  Internet connection: Internet connectivity is necessary to perform updates, and to download and use some features.Windows 11 Home edition requires an Internet connection and a Microsoft Account to complete device setup on first use.  

GOOD! The general populace that will click on absolutely anything and that doesn't know how to actually operate safely on the Internet should be forced to install updates when connected to the Internet.

The having to have an MS account is not a bad thing either. It makes it so the license is tied to your account and also lets you move the license to a new computer and/or reactivate the license very easily if too much hardware changes on your computer. You simply go to the activation troubleshooter, it asks you why you need to reactive and then you choose the name of machine you want to reactive on your account (has a list of computers on your account) and you select the correct one and it reactivates.

No more having to call MS or do the reactivation of text / a link, etc.

Bad thing forcing people to auto update when connected to the internet. These people should be educated about "clicking on everything" when on internet or about how to operate safely the computer, they should have the choice. The user should always have the choice. Forcing something for them just because you believe it should be like that, is not good and I have learned this with my 15+ years of experience at my work. The only exception is, if there is a way to run it without forced/automatic updates then yes you're giving the choice for users who do not want this and can take care of their data's privacy/security themselves. Give them the choice, don't force them.

As for the MS account... I don't want Microsoft spying on me and my activities. I uninstalled Skype from all my devices when the login started to do this:

"Allow microsoftonline.com to use cookies and website data while browsing microsoft.com?"
"This will allow microsoftonline.com to track your activity."

And it won't let me log in if I don't allow. Amazing. So I uninstalled it and ditched it for good. I can just use other (older) forms of messaging.

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:59:

darry wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:51:

As for version, Windows 11 tolerates 1.2, but strongly prefers 2.0. About 10 years separate them .

See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module

Well, if it works with 1.2, then it works.

For some computers a workaround/trick/fix will be needed. There are a lot of youtube videos appearing now and showing how to do it. But they are all based on the beta. The public release certainly will not work.

At work locations, the users absolutely should not be given the choice of whether they update or not.

As for home users.... have you ever heard of botnets or viruses or other malware? What about cryptoware?

I agree that people should be educated about this... but who is going to educate them? Not like most people are going to take the time or even know that they need to know about these types of things until it is too late.

Maybe Microsoft can host free, public, mandatory classes for everybody on the whole planet. How would that work out?

Maybe people should not be allowed to own a computer before they have passed a class that teaches them such things. How exactly would that work out?

The best way currently to help protect these people is to make sure that their computers are required to update automatically when online.
If you think there is a better way then please tell me.

As for cookies, they aren't necessarily bad. They do help the companies know what parts of their sites are being used and what is not being used and how they are being used.
As a company, they have the right to choose how to run their company and what policies they require the users of their site to follow.

darry wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:51:

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK. […]
Show full quote

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:43:

robertmo wrote on 2021-06-25, 20:05:

64-bit means P4F needed (2004)
TPM means core 8000 needed (2016)

Wait, what? TPM has been around a lot longer than that. Even the Dell Latitude laptops and desktops that came with 2nd gen Core-I CPUs had the option of having a TPM chip.

Pretty sure my X79 (3-4th gen) and X99 (5th - 6th gen) motherboards have TPM chips.

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK.

As for version, Windows 11 tolerates 1.2, but strongly prefers 2.0. About 10 years separate them .

See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/tpm-modules … sive-windows-11
The mad rush to upgrade computers for an upcoming Windows reminds me of the 95 launch. 🤣

65C02 wrote on 2021-06-26, 02:41:

darry wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:51:

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK. […]
Show full quote

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-26, 00:43:

Wait, what? TPM has been around a lot longer than that. Even the Dell Latitude laptops and desktops that came with 2nd gen Core-I CPUs had the option of having a TPM chip.

Pretty sure my X79 (3-4th gen) and X99 (5th - 6th gen) motherboards have TPM chips.

CPU integrated TPMs are relatively recent . Discrete TPM modules haven a thing for over a decade, AFAIK.

As for version, Windows 11 tolerates 1.2, but strongly prefers 2.0. About 10 years separate them .

See
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/tpm-modules … sive-windows-11
The mad rush to upgrade computers for an upcoming Windows reminds me of the 95 launch. 🤣

Except in 1995, there weren't supply chain issues and hardware shortages like there are now. Additionally, Windows 95 was actually worth getting excited about, to a point .

What does Windows 11 bring to the table versus Windows 10 that actually makes most people go "I must have it" and actually want to buy a new PC to get it ?

I mean, Microsoft had to work hard to convince people to switch to Windows 10 while the bar to entry on the hardware front was low and the upgrade was free .

Now, Microsoft have come up with Windows 11 which
- ups the bar to entry higher possibly within reason on some points (TPM, UEFI, Secure boot) but arguably arbitrarily so on other points (CPU)
- has nebulous, ill defined and apparently changing hard and soft limits on hardware support post announcement (on a date that Microsoft chose, you would think they would be ready and prepared)
- is launched at at a time where hardware availability is a serious issue
- provides little incentive to switch (wow, Androids apps on Windows!) save for having an EOL date further away than Windows 10's

Additionally, whoever initially designed/approved the wondrous PC Health/Windows 11 upgrade checker app apparently
- didn't think that anyone would want to know WHY their PC is inelegible for Windows 11 (at least that was improved upon, to a point, rather quickly)
- thought that it was a good idea to only show ONE ineligibility issue at a time, rather than report a list of issues . Here is my experience with it :
First run of PC Health : you don't have secure boot enabled ---> Me : I convert to GPT, reboot, enable Secure boot in BIOS/UEFI and start Windows
Second run of PC Health : you don't have a TPM --> Me: I enable TPM in BIOS/UEFI and start Windows
Third run of PC Health : your CPU isn't supported -->Me : Now you tell me, you shoddily designed piece of garbage of a software tool ? (for reference I am running a Dell M4800 with TPM 1.2 and a Core i7-4810MQ)

Maybe there is a very well thought out strategy being executed perfectly by Microsoft and I am just too dense to understand how fantastically intelligent this is, but I get the impression that this whole thing was elaborated by a rather large number of people collectively using a very small pool of neurons on a timesharing basis .

Sorry for the rant .

EDIT : Corrected typos

Aww, so LGA1366 platform is out of the window and probably some or all AM3+. Probably early Sandy Bridge platform too?