- Reaction score
- 2,731
- Location
- Rochester MN
Wait, Microsoft has support for home users with Windows 10
There were other options for Microsoft
WTF are you on about? It wasn't that long ago every single released version of Windows required new hardware. You must be young in this industry to be 100% stuck in the XP forward days where the hardware just got faster, but didn't DO anything substantial.I would agree with that, if it was the same as previous releases when the perfectly usable hardware was able to upgrade to the new Windows version. Any rare compatibility issues were the responsibility of chipset makers and users themselves, Microsoft were under no obligation to release patches for their new OS on old hardware.
The problem isn't the OS becoming unsupported, it's that users are prevented from upgrading to the newer OS. We all know how well Windows 11 works on unsupported PCs of sufficient performance.
You must be stuck in the past if you think the last 20 years has no bearing on what we should expect now.You must be young in this industry to be 100% stuck in the XP forward days
Many unsupported CPUs are faster than Windows 11 supported CPUs, so clearly performance is not the reason.TPM is REQUIRED your alternative is to not use Windows. The CPUs that don't have that module have ancient instructions and are slow
It's not about performance, it's about features, support, and life cycles. The Intel Coffee Lake (Generation 8) platform was first released October of 2017, and discontinued December 24th, 2021. AMD's offerings in this space that have the appropriate instruction sets are slightly younger. The youngest of this specific line of Intel CPUs released Q4 of 2019.You must be stuck in the past if you think the last 20 years has no bearing on what we should expect now.
Many unsupported CPUs are faster than Windows 11 supported CPUs, so clearly performance is not the reason.
The code is already in the OS for dealing with CPUs without more recent instructions, and it's robust so is unlikely to be a source of instability. I mentioned above MS could have just issued a disclaimer about older hardware not being as secure, upgrade at your own risk.
I'm not personally fussed about this, not sure why you're resorting to personal language. My clientele is home and very small business users, many of which are struggling. Then there's the wastefulness of junking PCs that still perform well, the extra landfill etc. I think the requirements should have been more strict in regards to performance (e.g. 6th gen mobile CPUs and higher, and SSD) and the TPM requirement scrapped.
Recycling is not a great option. Re-use or continuing use is far better for the environment.
SMBs that cannot afford to march forward will go under. Which is again... normal. I'm done "feeling bad" about it. I'm also done wasting my life trying to find ways around it just so I can make $10.
That's what I said. You mentioned performance as a reason for not allowing upgrades on older hardware: "The CPUs that don't have that module have ancient instructions and are slow".It's not about performance
Irrelevant. 12th generation CPUs are still sold in PCs today, but probably won't be next year... has no bearing on whether Microsoft should support them or not.None of them are being made anymore...
Did you miss the part that where I mentioned my concern is home and very small office users? They were never "supposed" to refresh their hardware every 3-5 years.Endpoints are supposed to be refreshed every 3-5 years.
I don't think you really do. Recycling should be the last resort (before landfill). In preference to recycling, continuing use and re-use is far more environmentally friendly.I get the environmental argument, but that's where we need better recycling technologies.
So now you're bringing up performance again? PCs with 6th and 7th gen CPUs are already running with those OS kernel patches and they're still quite fast, their performance is not "murdered". Whether a user accepts the slight reduction in performance with the kernel patches should be up to them.The kernel patches to mitigate the CPU vulnerabilities in question, MURDER performance.
Considering pre-8th gen CPUs are currently still running a supported OS, patches are available and will continue to be created for 17 months.Which is why Specter and Meltdown style attacks continue to be, and will remain possible.
Did you miss the part that where I mentioned my concern is home and very small office users? They were never "supposed" to refresh their hardware every 3-5 years.
I'd like some evidence to back up this statement. Anyone else here agree?There is no difference in this reality between SMB / Home and Enterprise. All endpoints of the PC variety are by design to be replaced every 5 years.
Is it just a theoretical vulnerability that still exists or are there actual exploits that OS patches and security have been unable to prevent? What is the nature of those exploits? I haven't come across or heard about exploits affecting PCs with pre-8th gen CPUs, they must be exceedingly rareLet me put it to you even more simple, the fact that your machines aren't unusablly slow means they're still vulnerable.
I understand that, but my issue is when should they be recycled. They're in common usage now, will be for another 17 months, have been for a number of years. It's rather arbitrary to declare that they should be junked after October 2025. Another say 3-5 years would likely see them out naturally. Is there really going to be that much more security risk in the next 5 years compared to the last 5 years?Every single one of those old designs needs to be recycled, there is no fixing them.
And corporations aren't always allowed to do whatever they want. This issue isn't just about personal choice, it's also about what our society chooses to be acceptable. I see it as a "right to repair" issue and environmental issue.Not everything in this life involves personal choice.
I'm sorry but what are you talking about here?The boxes sold all tell you what the lifespans are
And corporations aren't always allowed to do whatever they want. This issue isn't just about personal choice, it's also about what our society chooses to be acceptable. I see it as a "right to repair" issue and environmental issue.
You're probably right and I don't invest much emotion into it at all.In situations like this, bemoaning anything is pissing into the wind.
It's the option that suited them the most, not necessarily society the most.
Of course it is, Windows 11 isn't... it's Windows 10.Yes, Microsoft has already started notifying Windows 10 users regarding incompatibility with Windows 11. Remember, Windows 10 is still as reliable operating system for several years to come.