I just find it fucking hilarious that people expect software to be supported in excess of 10 years, paid or not, when that’s never really been the case over the past 40 years of software. Sure someone will probably come up with an edge case somewhere, but if you developed software, and continually released versions and updates, would you want to maintain a version you released that long ago?
I just used Emacs a little while ago. A piece of software that’s been supported since fucking 1985. There is no technical reason for Windows 11 not to work on a machine that’s only a few years old and ran 10 just fine. It’s literally still the same NT kernel. In the past, you could still upgrade, and your computer might slow down and struggle a bit to run the newer OS, but it did run. This time, for the first time, they are forcibly cutting off older PCs for no good reason other than the TPM bullshit.
It’s not an expectation of 10 years of software but hardware support. I’m sure people would have upgraded to W11 if they could but unimaginable amount of hardware is going to be stranded for the dubious benefits of TPM 2.0.
Problem is that newer systems aren’t compatible with “old” hardware. So to you know, these computers being disregarded are still functional machines, if it weren’t for Microsoft and other big techs bringing new requirements. What to do with lots of machines that doesn’t have TPM 2.0? Ditch em all, contributing to more e-waste? This thought almost rendered an paralyzed man unable to walk again, as an “old” $100k exoskeleton was deemed “out-of-warranty”.
Linux works fine on older machines and can give them new life.
I recently had to use a smart phone that is over 10 years old (Samsung Galaxy S5 mini) and believe it or not, YouTube and Facebook Messenger still worked. It was slow a hell but it still worked fine.
I just find it fucking hilarious that people expect software to be supported in excess of 10 years, paid or not, when that’s never really been the case over the past 40 years of software. Sure someone will probably come up with an edge case somewhere, but if you developed software, and continually released versions and updates, would you want to maintain a version you released that long ago?
I just used Emacs a little while ago. A piece of software that’s been supported since fucking 1985. There is no technical reason for Windows 11 not to work on a machine that’s only a few years old and ran 10 just fine. It’s literally still the same NT kernel. In the past, you could still upgrade, and your computer might slow down and struggle a bit to run the newer OS, but it did run. This time, for the first time, they are forcibly cutting off older PCs for no good reason other than the TPM bullshit.
Spit out that corporate Kool aid.
It’s not an expectation of 10 years of software but hardware support. I’m sure people would have upgraded to W11 if they could but unimaginable amount of hardware is going to be stranded for the dubious benefits of TPM 2.0.
Well, MS did at one point say Windows 10 would be the last windows and they’d just keep updating it.
Problem is that newer systems aren’t compatible with “old” hardware. So to you know, these computers being disregarded are still functional machines, if it weren’t for Microsoft and other big techs bringing new requirements. What to do with lots of machines that doesn’t have TPM 2.0? Ditch em all, contributing to more e-waste? This thought almost rendered an paralyzed man unable to walk again, as an “old” $100k exoskeleton was deemed “out-of-warranty”.
Linux booted on a machine from 1971.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/09/hacker-boots-linux-on-intels-first-ever-cpu/
Linux works fine on older machines and can give them new life.
I recently had to use a smart phone that is over 10 years old (Samsung Galaxy S5 mini) and believe it or not, YouTube and Facebook Messenger still worked. It was slow a hell but it still worked fine.