Windows 11 usage stats within touching distance of... XP Windows 11 is continuing to struggle both in the enterprise and at home, according to figures published by IT asset management platform Lansweeper. Disappointingly for Microsoft, it has yet to even surpass Windows XP. Lansweeper's figures come from a scan of 10 million PCs, 20 percent enterprise and 80 percent consumer. The …
They want us to "up"grade for the sake of "up"grading, when there is NO! CLEAR! ADVANTAGE! to doing so (and very very likely, an (un?)intended cost goes along WITH it).
Once again, Micros~1 appears to have NO clue about what customers want or need.
[I guess their sales and marketing droids cannot sell ice cubes in Siberia any longer]
Win 10 "updates" now appear to slow down and sometimes even cripple otherwise working installs. With each update, Win 10 gets slower and less stable. MS tell us that the "cure" is to "upgrade" to Win 11....
This feels like a forced "upgrade" and the hobbling of Windoze 10 is deliberate. The amount of data shipped to MS under normal usage has increased significantly under Win 11 - is there even more spyware in this latest version?
The abysmal performance of Windows 10 and 11 on even the most modern hardware suggests that a migration to OS (probably Linux Mint) is the best option for my clientele. I think that this is close to the end for Windows - their "software as a (paid-for) service" model is uneconomical for many users, and is sure to be their downfall....
Not before time!
"..."Although the rate of adoption is increasing bit by bit, it's obvious that Windows 11 upgrades aren't going as fast as Microsoft had hoped, especially within the business environment," said Roel Decneut, chief strategy officer at Lansweeper..."
Go figure! When you rule out companies deploying it to new hardware because it doesn't meet some arbitrary hardware requirements, AND your existing OS is good for another 3 years of support, why would anyone be surprised at the slow adoption?
Add to that, that rolling out a new OS even with MECM (SCCM as was) etc is still a fundamentally large, slow, process for many companies then you just hit the point where the barriers to doing so are too high. And they really shouldn't be.
Intune can help - especially since the introduction of offline domain join (though the few attempts I've had at that on my home lab have been very hit and miss) but the biggest (artificial) stumbling block is that needing a new machine for so many. Especially given so many companies and individuals upgraded in 2020/21 - there isn't a new hardware refresh due for years.
Like many Microsoft products, Intune is good in theory but an absolute pain in the arse in practice. Want to move a computer from one software deployment group to another (i.e. remove some software and add other software)? Tough - you need to redeploy the macine as there's no chance of it working properly otherwise!
@Paul Crawford - you'd be amazed (or perhaps not) how often I've seen a corporate build mangled to the point it becomes almost unusable. And that's across the desktop and server estates.
Part of the problem seems to be things like group policy sprawl - settings applied that may have been relevant once upon a time but not anymore. Contrary settings (turned on, then off, then back on in subsequent GPO's, for example).
And then their idea of "security" - because someone, somewhere read the NCSC cloud document and tried to apply it to desktops rather than realising that there is actually an associated desktop variant.
And a million other little checks and ticks that slow a machine down or otherwise make it unusable.
I put Win 11 onto my daily driver because I'm in a position where I need to know the differences and other than the weird UI choices (but let's be fair - MS have been making batshit UI choices since even before Win 8 but they really hit the drugs for that one) it's not terrible. I've had no odd BSoD's or restarts. No issues with any apps yet and it seems as fast as Windows 10 was. And my laptop is two years old now but meets the hardware requirements.
And a million other little checks and ticks that slow a machine down or otherwise make it unusable.
Quite. Had (and still have) that with many corporate laptops. Not too bad, in some cases even quite nippy, until the corporate bloat is piled on so that end result is totally unresponsive laptop that runs like in treacle. One suffers to even get to password prompt from screensaver let alone trying to do anything else.
I suppose it is secure since you can't do bugger all on it... Thank $deity I do all the stuff in PuTTY sessions etc. If only I could just reimage with FreeBSD or Linux but corporate....
They must be amazed to discover that making their customers throw out and replace every PC in their business with a new one in order to run exactly the same software as before wasn't exactly "compelling".
> They must be amazed to discover
Do they really care?
I remember those very same "slow adoption" articles (followed by the same snarky comments) when Win10 was released. It took Win10 quite a while to become relevant, but it eventually did, and the same will happen to Win11. Eventually. After all, what choice do people have? They can run, but they can't hide, sooner or later they will be forced to "upgrade" if they want to keep working/playing.
No. They don't care.
Corporate is corporate and its their hardware so whatever. At home the only reason for Windows is some games. I think they have managed to push the hate meter to 11 now, so its case of either a game runs under Wine/Proton or I just give up playing it. I refuse to be forced to a MS account to install/use my own local machine.
The upgrade to Win10 is unlikely to be the same with Win11.
If your PC ran Win7/8 well, then it was pretty much going to run Win10.
I think in this case the CPU restrictions (and TPM) are major barriers to upgrade.
MS revenue isn't from Win10 anymore and really Win11 income is dwarfed by 365 and Azure so I think they'll be monitoring the uptake quite carefully where PCs also run 365 desktop versions to ensure they don't interrupt the 365 income. You might find Win10 support extended until their Linux hybrid OS is ready.
Modern hardware has passed the point that the end users get significant benefit from the purchase of new computer hardware.
In 2000 a 5 year old PC would have been a Pentium running at 60-100Mhz. A new replacement would have been a 400 Mhz Pentium II or a AMD Thunderbird at ~1000 Mhz so you'd have had a minimum of a 400% improvement in processing power with a new computer.
I have a bunch of HP DC7900's (produced ~2008) loosely as part of the desktop estate which are a pair of Core 2 Duo cores running at 3Ghz on two cores with an SSD, 8GB of RAM and a Quadro card for a pair of monitors. Admittedly, that was a life extension on them about a decade ago which has kept them running to the point of absurdity, and they dodged the scrapheap again at the start of the pandemic by going home with staff in lieu of laptops, but they still do most administrative office tasks perfectly well after 14 years.
The hardware frankly is "good enough" now to not need replacing every 3-5 years for the substantive majority of most office's userbases and I would suggest that at least ten years service would not be an unreasonable expectation for the substantial majority of hardware without artificially forced reasons to replace it.
Exactly this!
We have a bunch of HP 8300 Desktops that must be 10 plus years old, places like warehouse etc where they run basically Outlook and a couple of web browser tabs all day then get shut down on the dot of 4PM.
I know we should refresh them, but why when they work, users are not complaining and they support the latest OS and security patches?
Brand new Dell laptops that we buy, with an i7, 16Gb RAM etc, i would expect to easily make 5 years from a performance perspective. Just depends if the user can look after it which is generally when an early refresh is called for.
I don't really agree with the "we should refresh them" part. That best practice originally had a good reason; after 3 or at a push 5 years things had moved on so far that it was absurd running an estate with mixed OS's given the absurd upgrade costs for Windows and the fact the hardware probably wouldn't run it at a useful speed anyway. (That, and the hardware was so chronically unreliable and all used bespoke parts that you could only get through the OEM meant that you always kept everything in support because it was too expensive not to)
For most environments now it makes much more sense to hang onto hardware until it is no longer fit for purpose, and keep a few usable spare PC's from where upgrades have been done. If an older PC does snuff it then just shrug and replace it with another older one.
"fit for purpose" can be a really, really long time if shuffled off to lower use environments for staff with limited operation requirements such as reception, administrative (or in your case warehousing) tasks where the PC just needs to run office and a web browser.
Laptops tend to have a much shorter service life simply due to the battery only lasting a thousand charge cycles, but there is no real reason that desktop equipment shouldn't last a lot, lot longer.
We still have 4 IT suites with HP DC7800/7900's bought in 2010 (2 to 4Gb RAM, original hard drives, and internal graphics). Whilst showing signs of old age and the ravages of student use, they're happily running Windows 10 2019 LTSC fast enough for student use and will probably continue to do so until support from MS ends... Or I could spend around £18K a suite upgrading to Win 11 ...
*Per suite*, which I'm assuming is about thirty machines or so. Keyboards and monitors don't need to be replaced, so that' £(600 to 700) per machine. Seems cheap to me; might be that much to get them in a box on a palette by the front gate, but by the time you've installed and configured them, stuck a PAT label on them, wiped and ejected the old ones, then the man hours add up.
This post has been deleted by its author
Have serveral HP 8300 connected to big screens, no keyboard or mouse, running Chrome in kiosk mode displaying a status page. Set it up to autologin Windows, start chrome - job done. Even set up the BIOS so if there is a power cut if will automatically start up.
Been runnning for years - 4GB RAM, 500GB HDD. When they start to play up, I have been upgrading to a SSD and 8GB of RAM - but not before! Last one I had to look at, couldn't remember where I had hid the bloody PC!
Keep meaning to run one of those SMART HDD reporting doo-hickeys - see how many hours they have been powered on for...
Still have a few Core2Duo equipped HP DC5700 and DC5800 machines out in the field; they originally came from 2007 and with Windows XP, but took Windows 7, then Windows 10 fine with just an SSD Upgrade.
They're as of last year now slowing the users down (mainly because of modern web pages spiking the CPU), but they certainly don't owe us anything.
For a laugh, I may try and put Windows 11 on one that's TPM Equipped before scrapping it to see how it runs.
We know the hardware spec is at least partially artificial: Typing this from a 4th Gen Intel Core system with a TPM that's running Windows 11, as it "Soft Failed" the spec check. Trouble is, we can't recommend this for business, because Microsoft may flip the softfail off switch at any given time...
On the other hand, I have encountered giant companies which issue laptops from about 7 years ago, and which are not fit for current purpose.
I know someone who has to work on multiple excel files (at least one which is pretty big), with outlook and a few browser tabs (some cloud stuff they need to use), etc. 8GB ram on that laptop. Not to forget it's bogged down with all sorts of security stuff.
Even booting up that damn laptop takes 5 to 10 minutes and since everything is thru a VPN for working from home now, it all goes to crap speed. And she is seated at home, with a 1gbps connection, barely getting 20mbps thru her VPN. And occasionally she is forced to reboot in the middle of the day if something does not work properly.
Saving an excel file takes about a minute or longer.
She has her own laptop which has 16GB ram and is powered by a 4800U CPU, which is blazing fast in comparison.
It seems her 100billion+ dollars company can't afford anything better. If she has a better system/allowed to use her own laptop, she can probably literally save at least an hour or more a day. Or get more work done per day.
Not saying old gear is junk (I sometimes have IT gear which is around a decade old). Her company laptop is probably fit for purpose for a much lighter workload. Just that they don't seem to acknowledge that.
She has told them about it, often.
And her colleagues have also agreed with her that the laptop issued is not fit for it's current purpose (they have similar issues anyway).
I assume the company is short sighted and not taking the improvements in work efficiency possible into consideration. Maybe will cut into the senior exec bonuses if they have to get proper computing devices.
The issue you are describing would appear to be more the limitations of the network connection via the VPN than the laptop hardware.
A better solution there might be RDS; there would be no data on the remote device for the user to potentially lose, and the performance would be quite a bit better.
>>> "Modern hardware has passed the point that the end users get significant benefit from the purchase of new computer hardware."
This touches on an issue that goes far beyond Windows 11: the fact that software innovation stopped about two decades ago. The 1990s saw dozens of software publishers vying to field the Next Great Application. That stopped in the early 2000s.
Today, we rely on decades-old applications - or slightly modernized versions thereof. Windows 10 and Windows 11 are perfect examples - neither of them lets users do anything much they couldn't do just as well on Windows 2000. After two decades of 'improvement,' they don't even make the old tasks easier or more efficient. On the contrary, each new version seems to delight in destroying successful workflows.
The software slowdown became embarrassingly obvious with the launch of Windows 10, when Microsoft actually boasted that its new OS would use LESS CPU capacity most of the time. This sounded great, as long as one didn't stop to realize what it really meant - that Microsoft couldn't come up with any way to use more than a few percent of a PC's processing capability. Software evolution had not only fallen behind hardware, the dominant software publisher had stopped trying to catch up and instead declared stagnation to be a virtue.
Microsoft clearly has no intention (or ability) to make further substantial improvement in Windows, or Office. So all future 'upgrades' will happen only at the point of a gun - expiring support, end of security updates, SAAS contracts, etc. Linux has been the logical upgrade from every version of Windows for at least a decade. It at least has the potential to reopen the sluice gates of innovation - IF Microsoft's stranglehold on the market ever allows it to get a proper foothold.
I think a part of the problem is the graphics with everything. The beeb is a prime example. Someone told them a picture is worth a thousand words and now they stuff them into every article wether useful (ie enhanced the article) or not. I have an ultra portable with Mint on it which is my TV watching and early morning news reading PC. Its only the wadges of pictures that makes it seem slow.
Just wait until all screens are 64K image resolution (probably with 3D as well) and see how much CPU is needed to carry out a trivial task.
I bought a middle end gaming laptop in 2017. I upgraded it to 32Gb of memory and two 1Tb SSDs. It only just fails the CPU for Windows 11.
It's significantly faster than any corporate laptop I've ever been given.
I boot to Windows for work only to edit documents (libraoffice is ok but there are a few issues) and when I need to use visual studio (once last year). The rest of the time I'm using Linux for both home and work
The odd one is that for a new project we have to use Windows to connect to a secure network. All the work will be done in VMs running Linux....
For many cases, true. I recently replaced my 15 year old home computer for a refurbished 10 year old one that was all but free. (Linux, in case you care.) New hardware, ha ha, what on earth for?
Granted, some use cases require the latest and greatest, and if it must be Windows then it's going to be Windows 11 simply because that's what it comes with. I shouldn't be making predictions and you shouldn't pay attention to them, but my guess is that is where most Win 11 market share growth will come from.
But... But... NEW! SHINY! New *AND* Shiny! And... and... and... ELEVEN! Yeah we turned windows up to 11 this time! Yeah, it's a HIGHER NUMBER than Ten, which means BETTER!
So, we MUST upgrade, even if it reduces efficiency or adds to the daily cost of operation.
</snark>
For me, as a tech nerd, developer and gamer, Windows 10 is brilliant, the best version yet.
It looks good, does everything I need it to, and doesn't crash.
I have absolutely zero intention of installing 11 until Win10 is completely out of Enterprise support.
Even then, I'll be modding it to look like 10, if there is no option for classic start menu/taskbar etc.
For me as a tech nerd, sysadmin and gamer Windows 10 is crap, the worst version yet.
It looks utter shite, does things behind my back whether I want to or not. Configuration is inconsistent mess. Granted its reasonably stable, but then were the other versions if you ran them on stable hardware.
> but then were the other versions if you ran them on stable hardware
This! ^^
I (almost?) never had Windows crash on me (programs did, but never Windows on its own) back in Win2000, WinXP, Win7 days.
But then again I ran them on clean hardware, with stable, reliable drivers, didn't install all the junk people use(d) to install to slow down their computers (huge pointless TSRs installed with scanners and printers were a classic), and got week-long uptimes from my workstations (didn't bother to power them down, but they were rebooted each weekend).
I (almost?) got week-long uptimes from my workstations (didn't bother to power them down, but they were rebooted each weekend).
I've got a machine at a radio studio running Mint 18, with an uptime of over four years!. It's running 24 / 7 / 365 and has yet to fail! My only concern is for the spinning rust drive.....
> an uptime of over four years!
Sure, sure, but this is not a pissing contest. There was no rational reason to leave an office Windows workstation running for more than a week, and even those week-long runs happened only when they ran calculations during off hours. Electricity doesn't grow on trees.
My point was just that clean installations of old Windowses were quite stable, at least in my experience. Obviously the overloaded personal computers most people used were extremely crash-prone, but this wasn't a fatality. *shrug*
These are two totally different computing environments (gamers and office workers), I see them both as functional for their users but each environment would be far safer and functional if it was optimized for the work that they do. Creating an operating system optimized for both gamer's and office workers is pretty much like having a girl friend (or boy friend) who works in a whorehouse.
I’m not surprised. I haven’t heard anything bad about Windows 11, other than the usual grumbling that one hears about something new. On the face of it, I’m the sort of person who’d have upgraded like a shot. However…
Windows 11 doesn’t run on my HP Z800, at least, not without a good deal of farting around that I’m not prepared to do.
I could upgrade to a newer PC - but why should I? Linux works perfectly on my Z800, and I don’t use Windows frequently enough for it to be worthwhile to upgrade.
I have another machine, a Ryzen powered machine that I use for games. It’s currently running Windows 10, and will happily run Windows 11 - but my plan there (and has been for some time - nothing to do with Windows 11) is to upgrade to SteamOS - I hear good things about Proton.
So all in all, I would upgrade to Windows 11. But I can’t. And it was Microsoft’s decision to lock me out of that upgrade.
There are however, two rather large problems.
1) They've thrown out literally everything anyone has ever learned about designing WIMP UIs.
Thus while the OS itself is fine, the new shell they've put around it is actively user-hostile - perhaps not as egregious as Win 8.0, but close.
The amount of retraining needed is massive - switching to macOS would be a similar level of user training for the average person who just wants to get their job done with the minimum of fuss.
Switching 90% of corporate users to Linux would actually be easier, as shells exist that look and feel pretty much exactly like Win7 & 10. (The last ~10% have stuff that doesn't run well under Linux, so can't realistically use it)
Power users have it even worse, as a lot of the quality-of-life customizations are totally gone - and of course power users are those most likely to be using Windows-only applications.
2) The hardware requirements are batshit insane.
Some brand new, mid-tier machines can't run it at all. They'll still be in standard vendor support when Win10 goes out of support. If MS stick to that timetable the faeces really will hit the air circulation device...
This is where one of the weirdest things about Linux come into play. If somebody would dare to suggest migrating to Linux, he will be shot down quickly with the deadly question about the costs of retraining users. However, during all this time Windows UI has changed many times and nobody did ever bother to consider this aspect because you're supposed to know Windows, aren't you ?
Raise your hand here how many of you have received formal training on how to use Windows 8 ? If you were lucky enough, a techie would show you the icons for MS Office and Internet Explorer to bring you up to speed.
I'd quite happily use and support Linux.
If it ran the productivity software that is required to run our business. It doesn't. It also doesn't have anything vaguely comparable for our industry.
The licensing cost of the software we use is also considerably under the cost of hiring a hundred developers for a decade to develop something comparable.
@Richard 12 “The amount of retraining needed is massive - switching to macOS would be a similar level of user training for the average person who just wants to get their job done with the minimum of fuss.
Switching 90% of corporate users to Linux would actually be easier, as shells exist that look and feel pretty much exactly like Win7 & 10.”
What retraining? Most corporate users have very little direct interaction with the OS most of their time is spent working in the various applications needed to do their work who’s GUI layout will not have changed.
Most of that OS interaction will be starting applications and general tasks like coping, deleting and moving files in the file explorer. None of which is really any different certainly nothing that would require retraining. Pinning applications to the taskbar or desktop are done in the same way as Win 10 as is logging on.
So what retraining is needed?
Most corporate users could also be switched to Linux or a Mac with little or any OS retraining. But there may be massive retraining on the applications they use.
Said it before & will probably say it again in a month or so.
80-90% of users just want the desktop icons in the same place & to do the same thing, they don't care about the OS or the GUI.
"Most corporate users could also be switched to Linux or a Mac with little or any OS retraining. But there may be massive retraining on the applications they use." - Depends on the business, a lot of our required software has no Linux equivalent so we are tied to Window.
Windows 11 doesn't seem to be being pushed out though. I have Windows 11 ready machines, that are still on windows 10, but are not telling me to upgrade yet. It's been this way since the beginning, MS have only been allowing it out in drips. Sure some people can force the upgrade through, and I am one of those (on a couple of machines), but all I've been met with are bugs which have made me glad it isn't being pushed out wholesale yet. Once MS pushes the button that activates the full roll-out, these figures will change.
Same for me, had a spare laptop that could be sacrificed to try it on.
First impressions are.... Why after 30 years of people clicking on the bottom left hand corner (with windows), do MS think that sticking the menu bar in the middle is a good idea? Then why am I having to click multiple times to see the app list?
Things look midly more pretty at the sake of having to put more effort into finding the thing you want.
That was enough to annoy me.
I have a combination of clients on Win11. None of them chose it. These are all "just click on every prompt" people.
I have those who just spend all their time confused on a PC. As long as they can see Chrome icon they put up with everything else getting rearranged.
I also have those who phone up in a panic that "they did something wrong and now all the icons are messed up"...
Best part of Win11 I have found so far is that quick rollback option to Win10.
But what is this I get greeted with on the phones this morning? In the UK, Win10 PCs. Fairly new. Suddenly the Search Box has an advert in it for "Premier League title race" Some new "feature" forced on people. With my first client it also involved a crashed taskbar.
This advert infection comes from a new Win10 "update". The hidden off switch is Right Click Taskbar, Search menu, untick "Show Search Highlights".
Microsoft - please - just make one page that lets me turn these adverts off. That "News and Interests" was annoying enough, now these adverts hidden under the name of Search?
> Microsoft - please - just make one page that lets me turn these adverts off.
You're kidding? Enjoy while you still can temporarily switch them off, because they are clearly the new reason to be of Windows, and they are bound to progressively take over all the GUI.
As long as the most expensive and select "VIP Corporate De Luxe" edition allows big and important businesses with deep pockets to switch them off, I'm willing to bet all the others will be running ad breaks like commercial TV: "Back to your work/game after this break"...
There was one positive. I did point out to this retired lady that clearly it wasn't a targeted advert as she would have zero interest in Premier League.
What is depressing is this junk actually broke her computer. They could at least test this mess properly...
That seems to be the new Microsoft tactic, it being an attempt to condemn millions of decent PCs to the skip.
To be fair, this has just as much been policy from competitors. The weirdest hardware is Chromebook which gets condemned by deadline, it being near enough capable of running on a Vic 20.
Indeed, marketing realized they were missing big profits by letting the customers decide when and how much they would spend.
Forcing everybody to spend when you decide it (and as much as you decide!) is so much more profitable, and can be adapted to your accounts' needs. Increased bonuses all around!
If, as it sounds like, you're quoting the AdDuplex figures here, then bear in mind that they're "based on data collected from around 5,000 Windows Store apps running AdDuplex SDK v.2 (and higher)", and that "Around 60,000 Windows 10, 11 PCs were surveyed."
In contrast, the Lansweeper figures being quoted here are captured across a significantly larger (166x) sample size, and aren't restricted to sampling PCs owned/used by people willing/able to install ad-supported Store apps.
So given that the majority of W11 uptake currently seems to be from home users, and given that home users are (I'd very strongly suspect) rather more likely than corporate users to be installing ad-supported stuff from the Windows Store, it shouldn't really be a surprise that the AdDuplex figures paint a far rosier picture for 11 than the Lansweeper figures do.
Given that Windows 10 is still supported until June of 2024 and most Enterprises (most Windows installs) still are running on Semi-Annual Channel, Windows 11 (21H2) will not start to roll out en masse yet. As the deployment rings move from semi-annual to General Availability things will pick up.
I think Microsoft is forced to extend Windows 10 beyond 2025 due to angry corporate customers. There is no compelling reason at all for them to shift from 10 to 11, other than Microsoft's arbitrary end date. At least Windows 10 offered a few minor improvements over 7, 11 offers nothing but the huge hassle of upgrading and dealing with hardware requirements Microsoft pulled out of their ass for no reason.
A quiet word of approval no doubt, since that will allow them to sell more computers without being accused to arbitrarily kill off recent kit. It's Microsoft's fault, see?...
You seriously expect them to complain about people being forced to upgrade perfectly valid kit?
> They'll be in breach of contract.
Who is "they"?
Microsoft? I don't know obviously, but I don't think they have a contract with Dell or Lenovo stating that they never will change their hardware requirements, and whenever that happens, there will always be a line of products which is bound to suffer from it, isn't it.
If you mean Dell and Lenovo, they will be more than happy to sell you a new compatible computer, and that's all there is. There has been a long history of companies arbitrarily EOLing perfectly functional kit for no reason at all, and in hindsight we all know pretty little has happened to them. Customers grumbled, swore they'd never ever buy again from those companies, and a couple weeks later life went back to normal. Dell and Lenovo know this story has only one tangible effect, that a lot of new expensive computers will have to be bought, and that's definitely a good thing for them. Nobody really cares about the impotent wrath of the internet commentard...
Changing an entire portfolio of programs regularly is asking for trouble. In real life you don't continually update tools and systems because the test and certification requirements would eat you out of house and home, you'd never get any work done. Microsoft should stop thinking in terms of a giant blob of code that has to be changed as a unit and more in terms of components that might need upgrading for bug fixes or security enhancements. Instead they continually offer us 'new and improved' which is more a playground for enthusiasts than an aid to getting productive work done.
Pardon me for the inquiry, but ..........
What universe do you live in ??
In this one, the words "Microsoft" and "think***" when combined in the same sentence yield incomprehensible gibberish pretty consistently, especially when related to their "customers" ( or is that "victims" ) requirements.
Everywhere I've seen went XP-->7-->10, for the simple reason that the support cycles support the skip of the interim releases and there's no business benefit in change for the sake of it, especially when hardware / testing / recertification / rollout makes it a multimillion pound cost[1] for the big boys. Next in line will be 12 (or whatever MS decide to call it).
I'm sure that MS know this, which is why they only change direction on the "interim" releases and then fix the cockups in the next corp targetted release.
[1] ...and before the usual 'tards chime in, the license cost of the OS is mere peanuts in this.
Where is the Microsoft that had the media blitz for Windows95 where there was a substantial departure from the old Windows 3.1 UI and they had to help educate people on how to use it before it launched? Setting aside people's preconceptions about Win11, Microsoft has done an absolutely abysmal job of explaining to people why this CPU made the supported list and some seemingly identical CPU did not. I get that every now and then you need to draw a line in the sand and leave old platforms behind, but you need to let customers know the reasons why. If they just gave some simple reasons, like "We need a CPU with AES-IN to support encrypting data in memory for improved security without a huge performance penalty, and we store the decryption key in the TPM 2.0 chip enclave," would go a long ways to helping people accept Win11. It explains why some CPUs don't make the cut (no AES-IN support and/or no TPM 2.0 support) and what they're planning to do (encrypt RAM for improved security). Just saying, "This CPU is good, this one is not," doesn't really tell people much and leaves plenty of room for their imaginations to run.
Sherlock because... it's elementary.
Microsoft don't need to spend millions on marketing to show people how to use their new OS anymore, because unlike back in 1995 they now have almost total market dominance especially in the business world. So for many its either a choice of upgrade to 11 or stay on 10 and eventually you will stop getting security patches or have to fork out a fortune for extended support.
I am thankful that I managed to make the switch to Linux around 12 years ago and can now do all my everyday tasks without needing to boot to Windows. But I realise that the small percentage that Windows 11 has at current is still a huge magnitude more than the number of desktop Linux installs. And that won't changed until we get Linux preinstalled on PCs by major manufactures and in the high street shops along side Windows PCs.
You kind of missed the forest for the trees there my friend. When Windows95 launched they had to convince people of the benefits and also explain to people why the hardware requirements were something of a jump from Win 3.1. No doubt if there had been much of an Internet to speak of back then you'd see a lot of people making the same whinges as now, just like we've seen every time MS releases a new OS. First year or two is always people complaining about how it's bloated, their current system works Just Fine(tm), and they'll pry "Previous Windows Version" out of their cold dead fingers. Then by year 2-3, the hardware has usually caught up, people start buying new computers with the new version of Windows on it, and all the old complaints are forgotten. Might be more like 3-4 years now that we've kind of hit the point of diminishing returns with CPUs, but the basic process will still play out the same, just a little slower.
Microsoft has done a piss poor job of explaining to people why they made the decisions they did with Win11 is the problem. People will get over the taskbar thing and whatever other little things they've latched onto in an attempt to convince themselves they made the right choice. What they won't get over is not knowing why Microsoft drew the line in the sand where it did. In a post-fact world full of conspiracy theories and general nuttery, it makes you wonder. Especially given Microsoft's history of being the curly mustachioed villain of the computing world and it being well deserved.
People won't get over the taskbar thing, because it's Bloody Stupid.
Having the launcher menu away from the corner makes it far harder to hit, especially for people who aren't so great at mousing.
Letting it move around will continually trip people up, as they click where it used to be, but just moved because something started or closed.
People like you or I will force it back into a corner, where it absolutely must be, but most normal users don't know how and will simply curse Microsoft - without understanding why they hate it.
MS have again broken long-known and long-studied HMI guidelines, for no reason other than to be different.
> People won't get over the taskbar thing, because it's Bloody Stupid.
The central taskbar is what Apple does, so it's "hip" and "fresh". (Besides they don't give a damn if it is usable, it only has to look good on those glossy brochures.)
Keep in mind Microsoft has been steadily and constantly removing usability and features since WinXP. I guess the version Windows is heading towards will just be a big ad billboard with two big buttons: "Use Office 365" and "Browse our cool selection of websites". Something like a phone GUI, but with less features (ie. less expensive to make and maintain).
How many years of articles about Win10 remaining more popular than Win11 do we have to look forward to?
Seems like we only just recently finished with all the articles about Win7 remaining more popular than Win10...
See: "Windows 11 growth at a standstill amid stringent hardware requirements" Thu 31 Mar 2022 // 11:19 UTC
Is this a private Yorkshireman sketch, or can anybody join in?
The workhorse laptop I'm typing on I pulled out of a bin in 2013. Flattened the hard drive and installed Win7. It still runs perfectly fine. The hard drive is starting to get rather full, so I'm intending to splash out twenty quid on quadrupling the disk size.
I suppose it depends on whether you are a Yorkshireman or not...
My daily driver came out of the Argos 2010 New Year sale catalogue, so nearly the bin. And yes, twenty quid on a new bigger hard drive a couple of years back, and all is good.
Now I've typed that, the bugger will refuse to boot tomorrow morning...
A new all encompassing "Right To Repair" law should extend to operating systems, to cut down on unrecyclable ewaste disintegrating in landfills and poisoning soil and water supplies for generations! MAKE ALL OLD OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT ARE NO LONGER SUPPORTED BY MICROSOFT AND OTHERS OPEN SOURCE!!!!! (Ahem) Making old OSs open source will stop them rebadging old OS tech to sell as "New" - they'd be forced to innovate and sell something genuinely new, every time they tout a "New" operating system, instead of dressing mutton as lamb.
"In youth, ideals were a proud mountain, on top of which you were master of all you surveyed. In adulthood they became deep, dark tunnels from which one peeked wearily into the light"
I'm badly paraphrasing someone here, probably a turtle-neck wearing French dude with a Gitanes in one hand and a glass of absinthe in the other.
Maturity doesn't have to lead to cynicism, but faced with the world we live in, it usually does.
There must be a file in the El Reg editorial room labelled something like: "Posts to use when Microsoft releases a new OS version". It will probably have a post-it note attached explaining that many readers will not have been readers when the earlier version was release or will have forgotten.
Come on El Reg, post something different.
f I believed for a nano-second that 11 would place even a *dent* in the vulnerability of every Windows computer on the planet--viruses, malware, hacks, leaks, ransom-ware, identity-theft, etc.,-- I might be interested. But evil-doers all over the world will take said nano-second to get around TPM and whatever else is in this "new" spaghetti code. And I'm not at all interested in spinning up and maintaining virtual machines in order to run Windows 11. Forget it. The only beneficiaries of this HW BS are the HW manufacturers. New PC's will be required for +50% of EVERYBODY. No Thanks. When support for 10 ends, it's Linux for me. Goodbye MS BS.
When support for 10 goes away, I'm going to Linux Mint or Linux Zorin. My 8 home machines (email server, Plex server, backup machine, sandbox, etc.) run just fine now, but not one will run 11. I suspect when I get them all moved over to Linux, next year, they might run even better/faster/quicker--for a LONG time. I predict (and hope) that the other big beneficiary of 11 will be LINUX: Linux consultants, Linux app developers, Linux-skilled friends and neighbors, and ME.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
