3 ms·

I don't really get what you're saying, but Windows 10 was released 6 years ago, and they're committing to another 4, so that's a decade of support at minimum.

spijdar 5y ago
Windows 10 has a decade of support but devices that were sold relatively recently will have significantly less time supported. You could have bought a new laptop just 3 or even 2 years ago that will now be effectively obsolete in 4 years. It's basically the Chromebook model, if you think of it -- and kind of radical of Microsoft to go that route when historically they've never really had stringent hardware requirements beyond the ones for OEMs to put those Windows Ready stickers on.
- staticassertion 5y ago
  > sold relatively recently will have significantly less time supported. OK but the 2025 EOL wasn't a secret, it was announced alongside the Windows 10 release a decade ahead of time, as well as the extended support date of 2029. So you had a decade of notice for EOL, and currently you have 4 years of notice that you'll need a TPM 2.0. Maybe you think that's unreasonable, but I'm not so sure.
  - avereveard 5y ago
    It wasn't announced that eol also meant "and throw away your perfectly working hardware"
  - spijdar 5y ago
    > you have 4 years of notice that you'll need a TPM 2.0. It's very uncharacteristic for Windows. Totally unprecedented, both for consumers with no tech knowledge and for the more technically inclined. This is the first time in the history of Windows where a large portion of the install base will be (ostensibly) totally unable to upgrade. When you buy a Mac or a Chromebook, you expect this sort of thing. On Windows, though, the expectation has been that windows would at least try to run on the oldest platform even remotely usable, e.g. Win10 (2015) would run on the old Core 2 processors (2006). It's not the end of the world, it just feels a bit slimy. I'm not one to cry "planned obsolescence" but this restriction (if it's hard enforced and not "just" requirements for OEM licensing) is clearly an attempt to nudge people to buy new hardware. Which is fine. Just unexpected.
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    99% of buyers don't know what a TPM is or if they have one. They also weren't shown such a notice when they bought their PC at Walmart. Virtually nobody buying a windows machine new today knows that their new machine has less than 4 years of life if it's 7th gen if they even know it's 7th gen. There may still be machines in retail channels sold new next year since Intel merely stopped taking orders for said chips last year. If it's EOL in 2025 you could have machines sold new that become unsupported in 3 years whereas the average lifespan of a PC is 6 years. Why are you defending a metacorp planning on creating untold tons of toxic waste and destruction of millions of dollars of consumer value. It ought to be illegal to sell a new cimp with less than 6 years of supported life from date of sale and buyers ought to be entitled to a partial refund if this promise isn't kept with the retail seller expecting to get their money back from the OEM who has a contract with suppliers like Microsoft not to do stupid shit like this to necessitate such refunds in the first place.
    - staticassertion 5y ago
      I'm not defending Microsoft, personally my belief is that: a) The intel stuff they're pushing is silly and should be loosened, and made part of their Windows 10 label OEM thing b) TPM 2.0 will be a massive step forward for security, possibly the most significant since XP Service Pack 2, and I understand why Microsoft is getting aggressive about this. Frankly, I think most people discussing this don't seem to know what the hell they're talking about. I'm really just presenting facts.
      - michaelmrose 5y ago
        What is the practical benefit of TPM 2.0?
        staticassertion 5y ago
        If you're asking about TPM in general, the answer is, among other things, cryptographic identity tied to a device. So, assuming it's everywhere, no more phishing for user credentials, no more password re-use attacks, no session exfiltration, and those are just a few - there are many more. Personally, I would rank those threats as being the top threats for the vast majority of users and organizations, so that's not nothing. If you're asking about 1.2 vs 2.0, 2.0 makes considerable progress on the original specification both in terms of hardening of the TPM and its capabilities, allowing for it to be used in a much more broad set of authorization and authentication schemes. If tomorrow every user had a TPM, and major services supported it, it would massively change the security landscape - I really can't stress enough that it eliminates some of the most widely exploited attacker techniques.
michaelmrose 5y ago
People buy computers not operating systems so the release date of the OS is entirely irrelevant. This is a link to a PC sold as new in box with a 7th generation intel cpu. https://www.newegg.com/platinum-microsoft-surface-laptop-jkq-00001-mainstream/p/N82E16834735574?quicklink=true https://www.newegg.com/platinum-microsoft-surface-laptop-jkq... The average PC is kept for 6 years meaning people would be expecting to use this new computer they just received say tomorrow as late as 2027. A minority of machined will remain in service as long as 12 years Historically for most of recent history Linux and Windows both continued to run on machines that were previously supported for much longer than 4 years subject to the machines capability to keep up with present software. For example not all hardware released in the XP era had vista drivers but not only did most XP machines work OK with vista if they had sufficient ram to run but whereas there weren't many machines sold with XP after 2006 MS provided updates to XP for another 8 years. This means that machines sold in 2006 were either in the OK to update to vista camp or in the OK to stick with XP camp until they were rendered permanently insecure after no less than 8 years of service with machine capable of running vista mostly being capable of upgrading to 7 as well for another 6 years of service. Even when an old machine has been necessarily retired by the shifting winds of software it normally has been due to being incapable hardware or oems not providing the means to keep moving forward. It is unprecedented in Microsoft or Linux land for such a monkey wrench to put put in the works. It seems likely that they will end up having to move the date back to allow a greater portion of machines sold including as we speak with incompatible hardware to age out.

spijdar 5y ago

Windows 10 has a decade of support but devices that were sold relatively recently will have significantly less time supported. You could have bought a new laptop just 3 or even 2 years ago that will now be effectively obsolete in 4 years. It's basically the Chromebook model, if you think of it -- and kind of radical of Microsoft to go that route when historically they've never really had stringent hardware requirements beyond the ones for OEMs to put those Windows Ready stickers on.

staticassertion 5y ago
> sold relatively recently will have significantly less time supported. OK but the 2025 EOL wasn't a secret, it was announced alongside the Windows 10 release a decade ahead of time, as well as the extended support date of 2029. So you had a decade of notice for EOL, and currently you have 4 years of notice that you'll need a TPM 2.0. Maybe you think that's unreasonable, but I'm not so sure.
- avereveard 5y ago
  It wasn't announced that eol also meant "and throw away your perfectly working hardware"
- spijdar 5y ago
  > you have 4 years of notice that you'll need a TPM 2.0. It's very uncharacteristic for Windows. Totally unprecedented, both for consumers with no tech knowledge and for the more technically inclined. This is the first time in the history of Windows where a large portion of the install base will be (ostensibly) totally unable to upgrade. When you buy a Mac or a Chromebook, you expect this sort of thing. On Windows, though, the expectation has been that windows would at least try to run on the oldest platform even remotely usable, e.g. Win10 (2015) would run on the old Core 2 processors (2006). It's not the end of the world, it just feels a bit slimy. I'm not one to cry "planned obsolescence" but this restriction (if it's hard enforced and not "just" requirements for OEM licensing) is clearly an attempt to nudge people to buy new hardware. Which is fine. Just unexpected.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  99% of buyers don't know what a TPM is or if they have one. They also weren't shown such a notice when they bought their PC at Walmart. Virtually nobody buying a windows machine new today knows that their new machine has less than 4 years of life if it's 7th gen if they even know it's 7th gen. There may still be machines in retail channels sold new next year since Intel merely stopped taking orders for said chips last year. If it's EOL in 2025 you could have machines sold new that become unsupported in 3 years whereas the average lifespan of a PC is 6 years. Why are you defending a metacorp planning on creating untold tons of toxic waste and destruction of millions of dollars of consumer value. It ought to be illegal to sell a new cimp with less than 6 years of supported life from date of sale and buyers ought to be entitled to a partial refund if this promise isn't kept with the retail seller expecting to get their money back from the OEM who has a contract with suppliers like Microsoft not to do stupid shit like this to necessitate such refunds in the first place.
  - staticassertion 5y ago
    I'm not defending Microsoft, personally my belief is that: a) The intel stuff they're pushing is silly and should be loosened, and made part of their Windows 10 label OEM thing b) TPM 2.0 will be a massive step forward for security, possibly the most significant since XP Service Pack 2, and I understand why Microsoft is getting aggressive about this. Frankly, I think most people discussing this don't seem to know what the hell they're talking about. I'm really just presenting facts.
    - michaelmrose 5y ago
      What is the practical benefit of TPM 2.0?
      - staticassertion 5y ago
        If you're asking about TPM in general, the answer is, among other things, cryptographic identity tied to a device. So, assuming it's everywhere, no more phishing for user credentials, no more password re-use attacks, no session exfiltration, and those are just a few - there are many more. Personally, I would rank those threats as being the top threats for the vast majority of users and organizations, so that's not nothing. If you're asking about 1.2 vs 2.0, 2.0 makes considerable progress on the original specification both in terms of hardening of the TPM and its capabilities, allowing for it to be used in a much more broad set of authorization and authentication schemes. If tomorrow every user had a TPM, and major services supported it, it would massively change the security landscape - I really can't stress enough that it eliminates some of the most widely exploited attacker techniques.

michaelmrose 5y ago

People buy computers not operating systems so the release date of the OS is entirely irrelevant. This is a link to a PC sold as new in box with a 7th generation intel cpu. https://www.newegg.com/platinum-microsoft-surface-laptop-jkq-00001-mainstream/p/N82E16834735574?quicklink=true https://www.newegg.com/platinum-microsoft-surface-laptop-jkq... The average PC is kept for 6 years meaning people would be expecting to use this new computer they just received say tomorrow as late as 2027. A minority of machined will remain in service as long as 12 years Historically for most of recent history Linux and Windows both continued to run on machines that were previously supported for much longer than 4 years subject to the machines capability to keep up with present software. For example not all hardware released in the XP era had vista drivers but not only did most XP machines work OK with vista if they had sufficient ram to run but whereas there weren't many machines sold with XP after 2006 MS provided updates to XP for another 8 years. This means that machines sold in 2006 were either in the OK to update to vista camp or in the OK to stick with XP camp until they were rendered permanently insecure after no less than 8 years of service with machine capable of running vista mostly being capable of upgrading to 7 as well for another 6 years of service. Even when an old machine has been necessarily retired by the shifting winds of software it normally has been due to being incapable hardware or oems not providing the means to keep moving forward. It is unprecedented in Microsoft or Linux land for such a monkey wrench to put put in the works. It seems likely that they will end up having to move the date back to allow a greater portion of machines sold including as we speak with incompatible hardware to age out.