Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: JAB <noway@nochance.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
Subject: Re: Microsoft Flip-Flops on Win11 requirements
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:22:22 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <vjeh1f$23rjg$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vqfjlj19rjoknncmst64ag7a2d8fs92lnp@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 12:22:23 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b89a8965ed290300fbd0fbe50a48073b";
	logging-data="2223728"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+hwgXVbsLr9Dp7coKQjJ3s"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1ZH6oYcsjtXZILU0PVB7bAZzAUI=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vqfjlj19rjoknncmst64ag7a2d8fs92lnp@4ax.com>
Bytes: 5260

On 11/12/2024 16:57, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> 
> Microsoft's Windows10 operating system was one of its most popular
> products. Windows 11, however, has seen a much slower uptake. This is
> in part because it requires built in TPM, a hardware encryption
> processor that not all computers have built in. While most new PCs
> come with the device, many older computers are left in the lurch. This
> severely curtails the upgrade options for those users, and instead of
> moving to the new OS, a lot of them have decided to stay with Windows
> 10.
> 
> Microsoft has been fairly adamant that Windows 11 users must have TPM,
> and have in fact gone out of their way to disable hacks that allow the
> OS to be installed on computers that don't have the module. It's not
> entirely without merits; several core features of the OS --including
> SecureBoot and the Bitlocker Hard-drive encryption-- rely on the
> hardware. Just from a support perspective, it's understandable why
> they'd not want users to install the OS on unsupported hardware. All
> the more since it is inevitable that were they to relent, some
> hardware manufactures /would/ skimp out on the cost of the TPM module
> and while all the savings would go to the OEM, it would be Microsoft
> that would get the blame.
> 
> So it's somewhat surprising that Microsoft has finally relented* even
> a little bit on the issue. It's still against recommended procedure
> (and doing so will get you warning messages and a not-easily-removed
> watermark on your desktop reminding you of your foolhardiness) but
> now, if you really want, you CAN install Windows 11 on unsupported
> hardware.
> 
> Which overall I think is a good thing. With Windows 10 falling out of
> support next year, it would open up a lot of PCs to hacks through
> unpatched vulnerabilities. It also keeps a lot of computers that are
> otherwise perfectly usable from getting junked just because they don't
> meet up to Microsoft's approval. And, let's face it, with the world
> economy likely to hit the shitter because of America's looming trade
> war fiasco, new computers aren't going to be must-have purchases for a
> lot of people for the next few years. So keeping older PCs running is
> a net benefit to all.
> 
> It's interesting that Microsoft blinked, though. I guess it just shows
> how much of their income is now dependent on income from outside the
> OS division --be it advertising, data-harvesting, or subscriptions to
> OneDrive or Office365-- that they're willing to sacrifice the goodwill
> of OEMs (who were hoping the Win11 TPM requirement would drive sales
> of new computers).
> 
> That said, I actually don't like Windows 11 that much; it's feels a
> lot less polished than Windows 10 (which felt less polished than 7,
> which was less polished than 2K, etc. etc. Maybe one day the world
> will all come to its senses and finally just migrate to Linux? ;-).
> But if your old-but-functional PC is still running Win10 and you were
> wondering what to do when Microsoft finally pulls the plug on that old
> OS, well... there's another option available now. Maybe not the best
> one, but it's an option you didn't have until now.
> 
>

I put it into the category of good intentions but bad implementation. So 
for the users whose hardware doesn't support TPM at all then you're 
better off moving to a supported OS even if it doesn't support all the 
more secure implementations of security functions. Then you have users 
(me included) that have a PC that does support TPM but it's not enabled 
by default so fails the Win 11 compatibility check. How many users will 
just see that and say, well I'll stick with Win 10 then. Maybe the 
health check app could do more to look at the motherboard version and 
determine whether it is compatible.

Having worked in security for a long time one thing you learnt was that 
functionality sells but security is generally just seen as a hindrance 
as it doesn't actually help you do you job but instead is at best 
neutral. Oh you've included encryption, excellent what does that allow 
me to do, errr ... absolutely nothing.