I wonder if anyone else is aware of the new system requirements for the upcoming Windows 11.
What caught my eyes was this line:
System firmware: UEFI, Secure Boot capable
This will be a death knell for any pre-EFI PCs 
All my desktops are EFI capable, but I also have legacy BIOS only laptops in a good working condition. While it is not a big deal for Linux users like myself, I wonder how many legacy BIOS PCs will create unnecessary e-garbage.
I did the compatibility test on my AMD based Win10 laptop and it failed, but MS are saying they will update Win10 through to 2025. I guess it will be another ZorinOS candidate then. I have no intention of consigning a perfectly good working laptop to tech trash.
I am not sure how this fits in with the new EU "Right to Repair" legislation. EU consumers should enjoy a “right to repair” and enhanced product safety | News | European Parliament
That is an interesting point. I did not think about it.
Just out of curiosity, I checked m/b of my 2 desktops. Both are almost the same vintage. The main machine has a workstation grade m/b and it is provided with a socket for an add-on TPM module. Other sub-machine has a consumer grade m/b and completely devoid of such socket.
I am not so sure if many of the unsupported PC owners will make a leap. It seems to me, a lot of people continue using unsupported Windows till the PC falls apart.
The good ol' NT kernel.
From the link you gave:
Blockquote
As of last month, 1.26% of all laptops and desktop computers worldwide were still running on the 19-year-old OS. That’s a greater proportion than much younger operating systems Windows 8 (0.57%), ChromeOS (0.42%) and Windows Vista (0.12%).
Windows XP officially reached end of life on April 14 2014, meaning Microsoft has not provided important technical and security updates for the OS for more than six years.
Blockquote
It is frightening 
There is absolutely no way I or any of my family members use unsupported OS.
Virtualizing Windows on Linux host?
That is how I run Windows for last 6 - 7 years.
While VM is not for gamers, it works quite well for my use case.
What I am not clear is whether it is possible to virtualize Windows 11 on the non-TPM capable Linux host. I think the only way to know is trying it in a real life setup. I know there is a leaked preview version of Windows 11 circulating, but I am not adventurous enough to download it 
[update]
Yup, it is doable 
https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/o75wns/windows_11_will_require_tpm_20_uefi_and_secure/
Blockquote
and if your system for whatever reason doesn't have TPM, you can just run a T1/2 HV, run vTPM, and install win11 there.
lots of advantages to virtualizing windows in a T2 HV though, including being able to control windows' ability to exfiltrate data..
Blockquote
I am not clear that Windows 11 requires Secure Boot. What I read in the links above was "Secure Boot Capable."
Tomscharbach, I agree with you heavily- but clarity of valid information is important. As many already know... I am no fan of Windows. But it is also valid that "dislike" can easily lead toward negative confirmation bias.
It seems likely to me that what we see today is quite similar to what we have seen in the past. Windows, when nearing release of a new version, amps up promotion on the Newest, the Latest... the okayist...
But the MS team does add further support on older systems by around the time of release or a bit thereafter.
This here is a valid fear:
But also shows why it is more unlikely to happen. MS is not going to want to deal with that kind of feedback. Any report detailing post-release reactions would be a very loud one. And MS popularity has slid slightly from being generally tolerated with a lot of damning P.R. blows, up to and including the shocking revelation that Bill and Melinda no longer wuv each other.
I mean, seriously... couldn't they stay together for the Kids?!
Personally, I am far more concerned about the details on the release of Gnome 40 than of Win 11. Because Gnome will stick to their guns and keep telling us what we want, but MS at least knows how to throw the users a bone and cave in once in a while.
And us? We are the lil market. Microsofts highest concern will be big businesses and corporations that are going to make life very difficult for MS if these corporations need to replace tens of thousands of individual machines or more... Nooo that's not happening.
As an aside: Welcome to the Forum. All of two posts in, I have already enjoyed your fast thinking and intelligent analysis.
Thanks for posting this interesting information.
I have been on a Dev Channel on 10 years old Aspire (my test PC). Indeed I saw the message saying I would only receive the update till the release of Win 11. That means Windows 11 can run on the older hardware, but MS does not want to make it available for such old machines.
I agree that it will be no surprise if Microsoft does make this a requirement. As you logically point out: why would they have invested so much in it, just to drop it?
This would not be over-all destructive on the Linux side of things. While it is better to disable secure boot generally and necessary only sometimes; It can be worked around. Linux would need to adapt. But it can adapt to it.
I think support for older machines is a fine thing. But it is as true that you cannot install Zorin 6 or Windows 1995 even on an Amstrad CPC 464.
We see this in automotive, too. As a classic car mechanic, I deal a lot with not just restoration, but preservation.
But the times are changing. And we cannot deny our responsibility to step up. The cars of the future will also come with restrictions and regulations that we will not like. We need them. In this case, it is not about a greedy corporation asserting dominance and control, but about the necessary sacrifices to undo the global Climate Change we have created, resulting in a massive extinction event right before our eyes.
At some point, we must be willing to accept change. For some things; embrace them, even.
This Climate Problem? Totally fixable. Totally. We can halt it in its tracks and undo it. But... It would be beyond just inconvenient... We would have to revert to Horse and Buggy, reserving any electrical distribution for Hospitals and labs, but not for homes. We can, but won't. With all the math and knowledge and climate science before us, with the option to solve the problem that plagues us actually available - we will not because ultimately, we care only about ourselves. We are a particularly self-driven species... Even if there is a chance we doom our own. Many of us do not care about the generations that follow after we are dead and gone. Some of us even deny the science, reject the evidence and claim that climate change is not even a thing.
Microsoft is a greedy corporation that asserts dominance and control. But if we, as basic human beings, cannot even handle Responsible change... We are certainly going to react to less-than responsible change.
We want support for older computers because new computers cost money. And we have to re-install and its a hassle. And... you know... I don't wanna.
There are good reasons for wanting to make a computers last longer - Making new computers and dealing with the old ones is a nightmare for the Environment. But on average, how many people are motivated by that reason over the drain on their checking account?
We have had a nice run of computer technology increasing in leaps and bounds. But we are approaching the Heisenberg wall. There's a limit. We slowed to a trot, then a jog and now are at walking pace. Soon, it will be a crawl.
Microsofts restrictions will soon mean nothing - when buying a new computer 3 years later nets you pretty much the same machine from 3 years before. Without an advent of Quantum Home Computers, really... The push for the Latest and Greatest is losing its edge. I could argue that even the most abhorrent of MS hopes and dreams may be too little, too late.
Windows 11 too problematic? People will just use Windows 10. Or... Linux 
I certainly keep my hope up for that.
Microsoft 
Linux, wasn't it?
That reminds me.
When I was running OSX on PC, Apple made a cut-off for (either Sierra or High Sierra, memory fails...) upgrade to certain Macbook models. In reality, hardware itself was capable for this new version. Sooner rather than later, someone came up with a method to circumvent this software restriction and released it on net.
As Confucius says "the higher authorities have policies the localities have their counter measures".
Considering the number of Windows users out there, I would not be surprised to see some people come up with such "Upgrade-Fu" 
It must be Microsoft eavesdropping their competitor's forum (us!) 
If virtualization is not the answer for this new requirement, it will give me an excuse to build another system 
My husband has to put up with a half build tower occupying the dining table for a few days.
[update]
Just chat with my Hackintosh buddy from US.
There is already a mod version of leaked Windows 11 which can be installed on (almost) any CPUs. He confirmed that no secureboot nor TPM nor UEFI needed, which means BIOS only machines can take it. So I was right about the possibility of Upgrade-Fu 
Agreed. I am beginning to waffle about my generalist point of view earlier.
The more I read up and look into this, the more something smells different.
Yet I managed to override those "restrictions".
I did that just because I can 
My 10 year old Aspire is currently running Windows 11. Since it is a testing machine, I probably go back to Windows 10 though (thanks to easy image restore by Clonezilla).
For those of you still interested in Windows 11, I found a very interesting app to test the system upgrade eligibility:
[edit]
This is the result of WhyNotWin11 on 10 year old Aspire [which is running Windows 11].
Yes, it is.
I have taken chances since this PC is my test bed and I have absolutely no personal data on it. I might also add that it has been flashed with a mod BIOS so that I can upgrade CPU/RAM/network card.
I got this leaked Win11 from the 3rd party.
As such, the only information I have is that the modification has been made into the dynamic link library. Not being a programmer, this is where my understanding stops.
Curious thing is that this modded Win11 can be only installed in a Legacy mode. I created another installer USB in Rufus using GTP and non-CMS mode, but it failed to install on a UEFI only machine.
It is a good precaution.
As I said above, I ran it on my test laptop. One of those "Kids, do NOT try this at home" moments
[edit]
I forgot to mention.
This mod Win11 also gave me a 32bit install option.
I suspect it is for corporate / institution setups where running 32bit OS on 64 bit CPU is needed for whatever the reasons.
[edit of edit]
Oh wait, I just read Win11 is a 64bit only OS.
This 32bit option must added during the modification.
It's my guess that pre-8th gen intel chips do not have the architectural mitigations for spectre and meltdown exploits being the reason for the specific recent cutoff. it was crazy times then.
And here is my last "just because I can" experiment 
Windows 11 running of the 11 years old netbook (Intel Atom + 2GB RAM) 
It convinced me that the system restriction MS imposed was more on the arbitrary side. While I understand the CPU security issue, I wonder how much danger it would pose for the average home users.
It comes across as convincing us that the medicine tastes good.
I really like your presentation and I agree with the concept that as tech progresses, we gotta keep up instead of complaining or making demands. I used an example of how we cannot install on old-enough systems earlier.
I hear your words and your words are good. Your points are logical and valid. Yet, I do not agree with you.
All of the above assumes that a structural hardware change is necessary for security.
I am sure that CPU Structural change is very helpful. But is it necessary?
Is it so necessary, even, to justify the strictest requirements ever seen in the history of Microsoft?
Perhaps MS is walking a tightrope, here.
But when it comes to computer security, it is all about mitigation, not fool-proof prevention. Perhaps MS is counting on the coming years (and after) of supported Win 10 to fill in the gap of replacing all those CPU's, because currently, pre-2018 is just not that long ago. By 2026, it may be more feasible.
But Microsoft really could have gone about this in a more productive way.
For example, they could have released "MS WIndows 2021", which is a step up on Win 10, but does not have all the strict requirements and lays some groundwork toward the Win 11 release of 2024. (These release dates and "Win 2021" are Fictional Examples).
Your points are reasonable and strong. But they come across more along the lines of justifying Poor Decision making by Microsoft, than they do explaining how it is the Right Decision.
I think this is true for us all in this thread. It makes this thread interesting, as it is an examination of ideas, assumptions, reactions and also - simply what it is that we want out of the computing world.
There has not been enough time to really process it all nor enough time for MS to make a clear response to the initial public reaction.
For me, I can see clear reasons to support the move as easily as I can see clear reasons to consider it extreme. Partly because we can all agree with supporting a Secure computing system; we usually wish to weigh that support against other valid frames of reference. Without quoting Ben Franklin, each time. I could also point out that compassion is as valid as freedom.
As a non-windows user, myself, I can only see this directly affecting me if future employment changes my non-usage of Windows or if changes in Windows reflect in Linux.
I think that this allows me more wiggle room in my response: I am less supportive of MS's move, here. It's like VIKI; her logic was undeniable; yet, so wrong.
Maybe it is because Bill stepped out and Satya stepped in and he is flexing his new CEO muscles.
Whatever the 'why' of it; it appears to me that MS has not handled this well. And that could cause even the most Right direction to still be scrubbed. MS may need to backpeddle those requirements; even if some people must ultimately be more proactive in paying attention to their own computers security.
Evolution in thinking is a great thing. A mind must be willing to explore possibilities far more than steadfastly adhere to believed Truths ™
I wonder if MS has any time for consumer users these days. Looks like they are focusing on Corporate market and leaving consumer users to their own devices (no pun intended). That is not a new thing, but the balance seems to be tilting further that way.
I enjoyed a 3year/4year Corporate laptop replacement cycle at one time. I wonder what will happen to all those ex Corporate PC's that fail the Win11 test when they come on to the second user market.
I just wanted tell you that I found someone else managed to install unmodified Windows 11 on the unsupported system. This might give a hint for MS's blocking mechanism for older systems:
Blockquote
I was able to install the "leaked" Win11 version on, ironically enough, an 11 yr old HP Pavilion with an Intel Q8400 CPU. The trick is to not use the standard Windows installation procedure and instead "deploy" the Win11 "install.wim" file via Diskpart/DISM or a 3rd party installer (which I did).
Blockquote
