• Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is kind of a nothingburger. It requires an instruction that first launched on AMD Phenom and Intel’s Nehalem architecture (1st gen i5/i7). I would think the vast majority of people running 11 on unsupported CPUs would be running something newer than that.

      • chameleon@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is also going to affect Linux distros, many are moving to x86-64-v2 or even v3. That comes with the same requirements this Win11 build is going to enforce.

        There’s plenty of life left in some of the later hardware not on the official Win11 support list, but hardware old enough to be excluded by this build is really overdue for retirement and/or being considered retrocomputing.

        • far_university1990@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Many distro seem to go with „one package v3/v2, one for earlier pc“ and make package manager install correct one. So no „cant use on old hardware“ impact.

          Also linux runs on 30+ year old hardware, not gonna change that now.

        • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          That makes sense, but remember that security patches are backported to old kernels for quite a long time. Therefore, using an LTS release of Linux should extend a computer’s life longer than Windows.

          • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            What in the world are yall running machines this old for? Literally a $50 modern computer would be an improvement, and would likely more than quarter the energy requirement.

            Just because you can still run 20 year old hardware, doesn’t mean you should.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Hahahajahahajha

        OK.

        Show me tables in any open competitor to excel.

        Show me OneNote/Sharepoint

        Show me SCOM.

        Show me file compatibility that doesn’t wack your files, so you can trust you’re seeing what the author intended.

        Show me Publisher, any kind of CAD.

        Which shell are you using?

        I can go on for days why the “switch to Linux” mantra is simplistic and naive, at best.

        Linux has its place, but I’m not dealing with supporting users with it as a desktop OS. I don’t even use it myself (other than to tinker), because I don’t have time to play fuck-fuck with borked files from one system to another. My “get work done” machines run Windows, especially because I work with other people, and I need to ensure any documents I send to them appear as intended.

        There’s a reason Windows is the defacto standard, and it’s the standardized UI (and not by accident, if you read the MS research from the 80’s). Add to that support for systems management since the early 90’s, with SMS, Exchange/DC (a directory service) that all works natively with the OS since Win2k.

        Linux as the base for a hypervisor? Fantastic. As a host for docker? Great! As a base OS for lightweight, dedicated-purpose devices (RPi, consumer routers, hell, commercial routers! IoT)? Perfect!

        • bjorney@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          To be fair, your arguments basically boil down to “show me equivalent Linux support for Microsoft products”

          You could make all the same arguments and conclude Macs are less suitable for doing work than windows, yet there are tons of professionals using MacBooks who get by just fine. If you don’t need to be fully ingrained in the Microsoft ecosystem you don’t NEED to be on windows.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      This barely affects anyone apparently, so feel free to upgrade. Windows 11 isn’t bad at all. I’m enjoying it whenever I have to use it. (I basically boot Steam and play games and reboot to Linux, so that’s the extent of it.)

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Windows 11 adds nothing good to 10, and introduces a bunch of highly anti-consumer features that are difficult if not impossible to disable. There’s absolutely no good reason to “upgrade” to 11 if you already have 10.

          • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Meh, OS’s don’t die at EOL. There are thousands, if not millions, of machines running Win2k that simply can’t be upgraded because they run industry systems.

            And before anyone cries about security - if you’re relying on the OS for your security you’re ignoring everything else (the other layers) that are required… You’re doing it wrong.

            There are thousands (tens of thousands?) of Win2k machines that can’t be upgraded because they drive industry systems. Hell, there’s Win95 machines doing the same. Their security is ensured by incorporating layers of control… As should be done with any system, commensurate with it’s risk and criticality.