Microsoft should stop with this charade and make Windows 11 a paid upgrade

[Nick H. Supervisor]

It's telling that you seem to have chosen to not respond to my post about why your theory doesn't make sense. But if you want to continue with this conspiracy then so be it, just don't expect others to go along with it.

[+Warwagon MVC]

Alright, lets say they made it a paid upgrade. Now what? Are you able to install it on any computer you want, or you now going to have customers who dropped cold hard cash on an OS upgrade they are unable to install because their CPU is not supported?

[freedonX]

On 26/06/2021 at 10:45, adrynalyne said:

This doesn’t even make sense. 

I second that.

Nonsense post.

Seems people were just born today. Software always have a hardware requirement. (win95, 2k, XP, 7, ...heck Linux too! ).

Can't expect to have new software on 5+ machines. It's not like Windows 11 will be the go-to tomorrow

[Mockingbird]

10 hours ago, Nick H. said:

It's telling that you seem to have chosen to not respond to my post about why your theory doesn't make sense. But if you want to continue with this conspiracy then so be it, just don't expect others to go along with it.

That's because I am having trouble figuring out what you are really trying to say.

 

I guess that you are implying that if Windows 10 isn't a free update, nobody would pay to upgrade to Windows 10.

 

This is certainly false. While many would not pay to upgrade to Windows 10, some definitely would.

[Mockingbird]

10 hours ago, warwagon said:

Alright, lets say they made it a paid upgrade. Now what? Are you able to install it on any computer you want, or you now going to have customers who dropped cold hard cash on an OS upgrade they are unable to install because their CPU is not supported?

Except that Microsoft allow people to run Windows 11 Dev on their PCs even though their PCs have unsupported processors, so it's clear that having unsupported processors don't preclude the PCs from running Windows 11.

 

Can you truly say that Windows 11 would run better on the Coffee Lake 2C/2T Celeron G4900T (which Windows 11 supports) than on the Kaby Lake 4C/8T Core i7-7700K (which Windows 11 doesn't support)?

[+Warwagon MVC]

21 minutes ago, Mockingbird said:

Except that Microsoft allow people to run Windows 11 Dev on their PCs even though their PCs have unsupported processors, so it's clear that having unsupported processors don't preclude the PCs from running Windows 11.

 

Can you truly say that Windows 11 would run better on the Coffee Lake 2C/2T Celeron G4900T (which Windows 11 supports) than on the Kaby Lake 4C/8T Core i7-7700K (which Windows 11 doesn't support)?

I don't disagree and I think it should run on everything windows 10 runs on. But I think even though you can install it on old hardware on the dev, once it gets released and gets locked down (unless MS changes their mind) it would ###### consumers off who purchase windows 11 for their current computer and then find out they can't install it because their processor isn't supported.

[NinjaGinger]

I know a lot of People are saying it's a free upgrade with the right hardware, but most seem to have forgotten Windows 10 was not a free upgrade. Like Windows 10, 11 is free as long as you give up your privacy. 11 is not free, it's like 10.

[adrynalyne]

15 minutes ago, NinjaGinger said:

I know a lot of People are saying it's a free upgrade with the right hardware, but most seem to have forgotten Windows 10 was not a free upgrade. Like Windows 10, 11 is free as long as you give up your privacy. 11 is not free, it's like 10.

Ah this old chestnut. 

[Nick H. Supervisor]

5 hours ago, Mockingbird said:

That's because I am having trouble figuring out what you are really trying to say.

 

I guess that you are implying that if Windows 10 isn't a free update, nobody would pay to upgrade to Windows 10.

 

This is certainly false. While many would not pay to upgrade to Windows 10, some definitely would.

I had to go and re-read my own post, because I couldn't understand how you got that from what I wrote. I didn't say that no one would pay for it. I am saying that the update to Windows 10 saw a high adoption because it was free and the customer didn't have to do anything special like buy a new computer. If it had cost money, or if people needed to buy a new computer, the adoption rate would have been lower and most people would have stuck with Windows 8 and Windows 7 because it worked for them.

 

Windows 11 will not see the same adoption rate as Windows 10 because there are going to be many people that don't meet the requirements and they will not buy a new computer just to have the latest operating system. They will be content staying with Windows 10. The same result would happen if you removed the TPM requirements but made it a paid upgrade. Microsoft know this and it doesn't bother them because they are not trying to get everyone to buy a new computer to run Windows 11 when it releases. Instead, when people inevitably buy a new computer later on that computer will have TPM enabled which will make it more secure.

 

If you still don't understand then perhaps someone else can do a better job of explaining it. There seem to be quite a few people that understood what I was saying so perhaps they can help. But I also appreciate that you seem to want to believe that Microsoft are doing this as some sort of money-making ploy, and if you refuse to look at all the evidence to the contrary there's not a lot anyone can do to convince you otherwise.

[Steven P. Administrators]

I'd happily pay $199 for them to shut off all the telemetry crap and creepy tracking in Windows.

[adrynalyne]

2 hours ago, Steven P. said:

I'd happily pay $199 for them to shut off all the telemetry crap and creepy tracking in Windows.

And to think people paid for Windows 7, which also had telemetry. 

[revodo]

3 hours ago, adrynalyne said:

And to think people paid for Windows 7, which also had telemetry. 

No where near as bad as Windows 8 / 10, and you know that. Also, very few people knew about that back in the Windows 7 era.

[adrynalyne]

6 minutes ago, revodo said:

No where near as bad as Windows 8 / 10, and you know that. Also, very few people knew about that back in the Windows 7 era.

Can you specifically identify what its sending? An example? Anything at all?

 

This is all too often a criticism of MS, but I've yet to see anyone pull up what the data actually is.

 

 

[Mockingbird]

6 hours ago, Nick H. said:

I had to go and re-read my own post, because I couldn't understand how you got that from what I wrote. I didn't say that no one would pay for it. I am saying that the update to Windows 10 saw a high adoption because it was free and the customer didn't have to do anything special like buy a new computer. If it had cost money, or if people needed to buy a new computer, the adoption rate would have been lower and most people would have stuck with Windows 8 and Windows 7 because it worked for them.

Could you get to the point?

 

Okay, so some people wouldn't upgrade. So what?

 

6 hours ago, Nick H. said:

Windows 11 will not see the same adoption rate as Windows 10 because there are going to be many people that don't meet the requirements and they will not buy a new computer just to have the latest operating system.

That's just stating the obvious.

 

6 hours ago, Nick H. said:

The same result would happen if you removed the TPM requirements but made it a paid upgrade. Microsoft know this and it doesn't bother them because they are not trying to get everyone to buy a new computer to run Windows 11 when it releases. Instead, when people inevitably buy a new computer later on that computer will have TPM enabled which will make it more secure.

First, the hardware restrictions is not just TPM. There are also processor restrictions. Microsoft doesn't allow any processors older than Coffee Lake or Zen+ to run Windows 11.

 

Second, if Windows 11 is a paid upgrade, why would prevent people from upgrading their existing PCs to Windows 11?

 

Why would it matter if people are running Windows 11 on Skylake and without TPM or whatever so as long as Microsoft makes $?

[adrynalyne]

4 minutes ago, Mockingbird said:

Could you get to the point?

 

Okay, so some people wouldn't upgrade. So what?

 

That's just stating the obvious.

 

First, the hardware restrictions is not just TPM. There are also processor restrictions. Microsoft doesn't allow any processors older than Coffee Lake or Zen+ to run Windows 11.

 

Second, if Windows 11 is a paid upgrade, why would prevent people from upgrading their existing PCs to Windows 11?

 

Why would it matter if people are running Windows 11 on Skylake and without TPM or whatever so as long as Microsoft makes $?

Support calls due to performance problems for one.

http://borec.ch/the-potential-performance-impact-of-device-guard-hvci/

[Mockingbird]

10 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

Support calls due to performance problems for one.

http://borec.ch/the-potential-performance-impact-of-device-guard-hvci/

That's not even a new feature.

 

It's already in Windows 10.

[adrynalyne]

1 minute ago, Mockingbird said:

That's not even a new feature.

 

It's already in Windows 10.

And turned off by default.

 

Not to mention, it is being heavily encouraged in Windows 11.

I never said it was a new feature.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

13 minutes ago, Mockingbird said:

Could you get to the point?

*Sigh* Ok: You're wrong, and the conspiracy is a daft one. That's the long and short of it.

Quote

Second, if Windows 11 is a paid upgrade, why would prevent people from upgrading their existing PCs to Windows 11?

It wouldn't prevent people from upgrading to Windows 11. Most just wouldn't choose to do it. Unlike tech enthusiasts, your average person doesn't care about having the latest OS, and if it will cost them money to do so they'll just wait until they get a new computer.

Quote

Why would it matter if people are running Windows 11 on Skylake and without TPM or whatever so as long as Microsoft makes $?

You're focused on the idea that Microsoft is doing it to make money. That's not why the requirements are there.

[Mockingbird]

Just now, adrynalyne said:

And turned off by default.

 

Not to mention, it is being heavily encouraged in Windows 11.

I never said it was a new feature.

Turn it or or turn it off. Whatever. There is a switch.

[+Warwagon MVC]

1 minute ago, Nick H. said:

Most just wouldn't choose to do it. Unlike tech enthusiasts, your average person doesn't care about having the latest OS, and if it will cost them money to do so they'll just wait until they get a new computer.

A lot of them don't even know what version of Windows they already have

 

Me : What version of Windows do you have

Them : I think I have windows 10

.... I log in ...

 

Me  ... You have window 7.

[adrynalyne]

1 minute ago, Mockingbird said:

Turn it or or turn it off. Whatever. There is a switch.

And that is exactly where you lost the plot.

 

MS is heavily emphasizing security. They don't want people to need to turn it off for performance issues, it is counterproductive.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Just now, warwagon said:

A lot of them don't even know what version of Windows they already have

Precisely!

[Mockingbird]

4 minutes ago, Nick H. said:

It wouldn't prevent people from upgrading to Windows 11. Most just wouldn't choose to do it. Unlike tech enthusiasts, your average person doesn't care about having the latest OS, and if it will cost them money to do so they'll just wait until they get a new computer.

...and why is this any relevant? The option is there. It doesn't matter if they upgrade or not.

 

4 minutes ago, Nick H. said:

 

You're focused on the idea that Microsoft is doing it to make money. That's not why the requirements are there.

Okay, so why is it there?

[+Warwagon MVC]

3 minutes ago, Nick H. said:

Precisely!

It's funny, they always ask me "How can I tell".

 

in my mind i'm always thinking to my self "Just look at the god damn screen" ... thinking everyone can tell just by looking at the UI like we can.

[adrynalyne]

1 minute ago, Mockingbird said:

...and why is this any relevant? The option is there. It doesn't matter if they upgrade or not.

 

Okay, so why is it there?

Its been explained. You are thick. I am done.

 

Get that last word in buddy, you will need it.