I'm sure many of us could work around them - but would you be wanting to run a whole load of business machines like this, knowing that Microsoft could if it wished bork them with an update one month?
It's not something I'm keen to do!
51 publicly visible posts • joined 31 Aug 2021
But no guarantees that they won't break it with an update in the future!
I can't see any point in trying to get workarounds to work - W11 offers nothing that I actually want and is not an improvement over W10.
Might think about it in 2025 if I have any machines which aren't officially compatible and which I want to continue using after the W10 end of support.
While Microsoft does offer a purchase option for Office, they intentionally make this difficult in assorted ways - e.g. shortening the period for which it is guaranteed to be compatible with their online services, and only officially supporting it on the latest version of Windows Server at the time it is released (used to go back to all supported server versions) - this is very relevant if you use terminal servers.
Microsoft appears to be trying to go the same way as Adobe, but didn't quite think they could get away with it in one step so are doing it incrementally, whereas Adobe clearly thought they could just go for it, and did so.
There is too much of a tendency in many organisation to decide that new and shiny = better, which is not always the case. If your current systems do the job they are required to do, the best option might be to stick with them.
The issue of constant change has become a lot worse in recent years due to software companies (particularly Microsoft) pushing at an ever-faster pace, and breaking existing ways of doing things to force adoption of their new and shiny way of working - and this normally means tying it into their cloudy services and subscription model and thereby making the constant change even more of an issue as Microsoft then has absolute control.
Apple kit up until 2012 used to be very well-made, and used standard components. Since then less so - lack of ports, awful keyboards, soldered RAM and SSDs. Some of these look to have been addressed, but not all of them. I assume that RAM and SSD are still soldered? That's a major minus point due to the likelihood of the flash chips especially failing after a number of years.
Now look at Florida and Sweden.
The reality is that there is no correlation between dystopian measures and number of cases, and there never has been. In order to demonstrate that restrictions work, there would need to be a consistent worldwide pattern of countries with more restricitons having fewer cases - and there is no such pattern.
To the thumb-downers - see the current situation as reported by the ONS:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf
Page 17, top graph. Take into account that under 40 the vaccination rates are lower. In all of the older categories, which have the highest vaccination rates, more infections were seen in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated.
Railway companies tend to do that as well - and use social media as the only way to contact them for a quick answer (they could have a chat function on their websites, but don't).
Often the only option on the website is an enquiry form, which might get a response in a couple of weeks. Maybe.
Another problem is the number of clubs and societies which use it as their only / main way to communicate. Fifteen years ago these would have had their own website and email list, or used something fairly non-offensive like a Yahoo group to communicate. Now they just have a Facebook page.
I have done some VM testing. My host is a 10-year-old Poweredge running Hyper-V Server 2016. Clean installs from ISO.
Provided you configure the VM with access to the TPM and secure boot, it installs fine (despite the age of the server, it does actually have TPM2). The CPU is is reported as unsupported by the health checker program, but it still installs despite that.
If the VM doesn't have TPM access, it won't install at all.
Right, so when Microsoft automatically installs it (which they will) - what then?
I'm sure we all remember how aggressively they pushed W10 onto W7 and 8 computers. This will probably be even more difficult to block, unless you have a good knowledge of computers.
Just telling users 'tough, we don't support it' is really not an acceptable answer.
SSDs will last a lot longer. I had to put them in our two main hosts urgently a while back as it was clear that the the SD cards were all failing at once (two SD cards in each host for supposed redundancy).
The bigger question is why major server manufacturers ever thought it was a good idea to use SD cards as boot devices.
There is the added advantage that they now boot much faster too.
I've been testing it on VMs this morning (clean install from ISO), and can report the following:
- It doesn't seem to enforce CPU compliance, and will install on older CPUs (ten year old Xeon in this case)
- It does enforce TPM. Won't install without a TPM. Not had chance to see what happens yet with TPM 1.2 - need to find a physical machine for that
- Not sure yet whehter it enforces Secure Boot
They've never gone anywhere near this far in the past - Vista was a dog on hardware close above the minimum spec, but would run, W7 ran better than Vista on the same hardare, and W8 / 10 run fine on hardware bought with W7. I've come across hardly anything which wouldn't run W10, even in its early days - think we had one old laptop which had been hanging around for years as a test machine which wouldn't due to an unsupported graphics chip, but that was all.
We currently have some desktops still in use approaching 8 years old (upgraded with SSDs), and they are fine with W10 for basic office stuff.
Ah come on, they are clearly really conerned about the environment - just look at this and see if you aren't convinced: https://www.microsoft.com/en-ww/accessories/sustainability/ocean-plastic-mouse
(just ignore the vast numbers of computers which will be scrapped as a result of W11, and the point that all surface devices have limited or no upgradeability and are mostly difficult to repair...)
"If you really meant immutable os and suggested building it in to the hardware in such a way that it couldn't be overwritten I might be interested."
Acorn RISC OS was like that - only way to upgrade was to open up the computer and physically replace the OS ROMs. I did this with a number of machines back in the mists of time (mid 1990s).
It's notable that Server 2022 is W10-based, presumably to avoid this issue with servers as they know that most companies wouldn't tolerate it. It does of course create a messy situation, as normally in the past new versions of client and server versions have been in sync (roughly).
I've checked our computers for compatibility and it's low - only a couple of the workstation are supported, and few of the standard desktops. Numbers are higher for the laptops as that's what we've mostly bought in the past 18 months.
On a related note, I'm sure that, like me, many want to avoid mixed versions. Easy enought with the machines updated via WSUS, but look at Intune carefully if you use that - from looking at it and communications with Microsoft, there appears to be a new policy section called 'Feature updates for Windows 10 and later (preview)', which allows you to create a policy setting maximum version and apply it to groups of computers - 21H1 is currently the most recent available, but presumably W11 and W10 10H2 will appear there in due course.
That's already the case. I think I'm fairly clued up on Microsoft's licensing, but even so I still have to ask the software dealer sometimes as it gets so complicated that nobody apart from a Microsoft licensing specialist understands it - and even them I'm not entirely convinced that anyone actually does as you can get a different answer depending who and when you ask!
Don't worry - Microsoft is going to save the world with this fine example of greenwash:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-ww/accessories/sustainability/ocean-plastic-mouse
Clearly we are expected to ignore the vast number of computers which will be dumped as a result of W11's system requirements, and the fact that Surface devices have little or no upgradeabliliy and are difficult / impossible to repair.
To make you register it and sign up for a Microsoft account. They are doing the same with W11 Home version which apparently can't be set up with a local account (they tried to give the impression with W10 Home that this applied, but provided you didn't let it see an internet connection until you were past the account creation stage it was actually possible).
I wonder whether the LTSB version can be installed with just the installer .exe and an XML config file which contains the activation key? That did work with Office 2019 Pro+ (no sign-in needed).
Was thinking of getting one of these, but lack of a hedphone jack rules it out - it's not practical to use a USB-C to 3.5mm adapter when out with it in a pocket - it's too unwieldly, and will easily lead to the socket getting damaged.
It's disappointing that even a company which claims to be about making devices which last is going down this route. Does it not occur to them that some of us are quite happy with wired headphones and have no wish to have to buy new wireless ones every few years because the batteries have died (or sooner if one gets dropped down a drain).
Phones do not need to be any thinner - it just makes them harder to hold and more prone to bending and damage. They are already quite thin enough.
DIdn't HP try the a device exactly like that Surface Studio Laptop a few years ago? It had a leather cover and was called Spectre Folio or something like that. They don't seem to have sold particularly well (saw them discounted), and there only seems to have been one model before they abandoned that type of hybrid form-factor.
I can't help but think that a lot of the commenters on here have never actually managed a network! Suggestions such as directly connecting the computer with a USB cable, or going out and buying a load of desktop printers, are not an option whcih many companies will accept, or which would in many cases be realistically practical to implement.
And what if you want to use GPOs to control/deploy them? Restructuring all the print functionality for every printer is not something which most organisations are going to do at short notice.
And drivers will still need to be installed, however you structure it.