Strangely it worked on mine when i disabled tpm in bios, windows booted (tested this 4 months ago). I am not sure if tpm is required for installation only.
When You want to do a fresh Install of Windows: Yes, it could be. TPM on is a Requirement that they want. You could use Rufus for creating the Windows Boot Stock for the Installation. With this Tool, you should be able to take out the TPM Requirement as far as I know.
When you are on Windows 10 for the Upgrade to Windows 11:
Then normally Windows shouldn't annoy You then. I had Windows 10 and TPM turned off, too and never get any of these Upgrade Windows. I only had in Windows Update at the left side a little Text that says that my System doesn't meet the Requirements. But that wasn't annoying in any Way.
1 Like
So, Windows was already installed?
Yeah, it even booted without secure boot. Which is strange since it's the OS from the Microsoft site and used their tool to create a bootable iso.
2 Likes
Interesting. Maybe we shouldn't talk too loud. Not, that Redmond hear's that, hahaha!
1 Like
With Microsoft, it seems like every other release is "good" and gets a large adoption. You had Windows XP, where a lot of folks and businesses used for a long time. Then Windows 2000 came and folks didn't like it. You had Windows 7 that folks like a lot, then Windows 8 came and folks didn't like it. Then you had Windows 10 which received some praise, yet Windows 11 doesn't. So I imagine the next decent Windows will be 12 or whatever they call it next.
I only use Windows for gaming and music making (lots of programs in those realms that I use aren't supported on Linux) else, I'm on Linux all the time.
Who knows what will happen with Windows, in the long run. I'd wish they would finally deprecate the registry and just move to having each app contained in it's own package, but I don't think that will happen in my lifetime haha.
They had more worse operating systems then good ones.
Good ones:
Windows 98/SE
Windows XP
Windows 7
Windows 10 (but disliked all the telemetry)
Bad ones:
Windows 95
Windows 2000
Windows Millennium
Windows Vista
Windows 8/8.1
Windows 11
I'll add a controversial take to this: I actually liked windows 8. With the caveat that you needed to add a traditional start menu, but once you did that, it was actually a very competent, leave you to your business OS that didn't have many flaws at the time, other than the rare time that you would be forced into the metro UI. I wasn't using it all the time, mind you, but the times I did, I was pleasantly surprised.
1 Like
so the things you didn't like were basically the main selling points of the update, while the things you did like were the ones that were left untouched from 7...
Basically, it's a situation in which your laptop falls and the screen gets slightly broken, but it still works and you can get work done with it, so you use it and don't give it much importance
Not quite. While the menu was a big change, there was actually a lot done under the hood. It included support for over 32GB of ram, and as I was running servers, was actually a pretty decent deal. It was also fairly performant over windows 7. And if you wanted to go a bit further into it, there were ways to get the system very slim (especially for a windows) and easily turn off anything you didn't want. In windows 10, it's extremely hard to do (well not hard, annoying I should say) but it was pretty easy in 8.
I'd say this is a bit extreme as a comparison. If you wanted to use the broken screen analogy, I'd use it as sure, it broke, but I replaced the screen that was broken with something better, and while it took a bit of time and effort, it ended up with a laptop way better than I had previously.
Which is exactly the same way, more or less, I look at Linux. It takes a bit of time and energy, but at the end of the day, you get something better than you ever had before. At least, for myself anyway. And it sure doesn't take up as much time as energy as when I started with Slackware 7 
3 Likes
Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Indeed, for servers that can be a big deal.
I have never used 7 nor 8, only seen them, so I didn't expect that. I thought it would have been worse with all the metro animations and eyecandy. I'm surprised
1 Like
The metro UI was slower, which is why you would want some other form of start menu to hide it, but the actual desktop that you used was quite snappy. I'm not saying 8 was great for average people, it gets the hate it deserves because I don't know who thought that UI was a good idea, but if you knew how to tweak it, it was actually pretty decent. But most people didn't know or want to know how to tweak it, so I don't blame anyone for hating it.
2 Likes
I did tweak 8 alot, even managed to get it booting directly into the desktop. Still i did not like 8 though.
If Microsoft would have given users a option “metro” or “desktop” during install then 8 probably would not be hated so much.
But it’s Microsoft where talking about, they thought a tablet interface would sell well in the pc market. 
To give credit where credit is due, I have to hand it to Microsoft for daring to innovate with Windows 8. It was clearly an UI aimed at 2-in-1 laptops and touchscreens, which is why it failed: most people using a laptop don't really need to use the screen all that much due to simple ergonomics. It did help to create the the now defunct Windows Phone (which was actually very nice).
Overall, I think they missed the point with Windows 8 but it was good they tried. Nothing beats Windows 7, though.
4 Likes
Including mobile phones. (That Microsolft adventure did not last long though).
1 Like
Yeah, sadly. I thought they were very nice, but couldn't compete with Android and OSX...
Then Microsoft tried to create their own browser engine, called HTMLEdge, but also failed and went with Chromium based. And then implemented WSL to remain somewhat relevant for system administrators and developers... Microsoft has been patching their own selection of products for the good part of the past decade or so. I don't think their solution to embed AI everywhere is going to work out so well for them, either.
I remember that Edinburgh duck on Tomorrow's World - Wave power is more efficient than wind power as it can store electricity, wind power can't and as recent storms have proven, the wind turbines can't work in Force 10 gales, not to mention the citizens of China being poisoned from the extraction of magnet material needed for the wind turbines! Bring back the duck! There is a natural hole in Wales somewhere near the coast that fills up with seawater and on expulsion drives a turbine. (oops! Got that wrong. Thin it is this: The UK's biggest battery is housed inside a beautiful Welsh mountain - Wales Online)
Here's an idea, fit turbine blades in taps for sinks and baths wired back to the national grid!
Hi Swarf,
The coastal hole driving a turbine as waves+tide rise and fall idea has been proptyped in a few places including Scotland, Norway and Japan, but so far only in very small scale. None have so far been longer-term successful - the environment is too challenging to machinery.
Your Welsh mountain is great, but thats a pumped storage system, for when there's sudden demand for electricity, but its not a source of electricity in itself.
Scotland has the original pumped storage system - its a great experience to visit, quite awesome to see the scale of the thing. Credit and tribute to the far-sighted pioneers of the 1950s who dreamt it up, and to the workers who died constructing it.
From 0 to full load (440MW in 30 seconds).
Whilst good for power for remote areas, I don't see any of these devices meeting the power demands of our technological world.
2 Likes
I think having the icon look so similar to the old Internet Explorer that people have been avoiding for decades had part of the fault there.
I remember giving Edge a try out of curiosity (before it was based on chromium) and it was actually fine. I switched from chrome to edge back then because I liked the interface a bit more than chrome's.
I was not aware about benchmarks nor overall which browser was more performant. All I knew is that, if there was any difference, it wasn't big enough to notice on my use case.
I wish they stayed like that instead of switching to a chromium base, because nowadays it's mostly just chromium and firefox, and a 3rd alternative would be nice
1 Like