29 ms·

I honestly don't understand Microsoft's plan with Windows 11. 6 years ago, with the release of Windows 10, it was all about "this is the last version of Window

by _l4jh 5y ago

I honestly don't understand Microsoft's plan with Windows 11. 6 years ago, with the release of Windows 10, it was all about "this is the last version of Windows!" and they went with the rolling release model. A little strange but they stuck with it for 6 years until suddenly this summer they announce Windows 11 and they went hard talking up how it was a huge change to Windows but in reality it isn't. At all. It has a new visual layer sure but the applications are still the old Windows 10 (and so really the old Windows XP?) ones with that new look. They introduced a new store and support for additional stores such as the Amazon Android app store. I guess what I am saying is I don't get why now they are calling it Windows 11? They could have just carried on calling it Windows 10. They have introduced big UI and feature changes in previous Windows 10 updates (perhaps not quite as big as the new taskbar and Explorer changes). It is a free upgrade for Windows 10 license holders (consumer anyway, not sure how it works for Enterprise?). It just all feels so rushed and messy and the end product is just not very good as we can clearly see here. I don't want to hate on Windows, after all they have introduced some really interesting new things since Windows 10 initial release such as WSL. It is just there didn't appear to be a want or need for a Windows 11 and this rushed mess makes it look like Microsoft didn't (doesn't?) know what it is doing with Windows either. Shrug.

wolpoli 5y ago
Windows 11 is indeed rushed. Since Apple released MacOS 11, Microsoft needs to release a new version as well. It's obvious[1] that Microsoft took the features made for Windows 10x and glued them into Windows 10. [1]: https://twitter.com/vhanla/status/1434730813183209472 https://twitter.com/vhanla/status/1434730813183209472
mattl 5y ago
Apple was doing Mac OS X forever but then it went to 11 and soon 12 (in reality still Max OS X)
fbelzile 5y ago
Probably some marketing experts thinking that Windows 10 would seem out-of-date now that Apple decided to stop versioning macOS at 10.x forever.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  I was in the same place as the parent comment until I started seeing a blitz of laptop ads after not having seen them for years. Mostly around Windows 11-ready machines. So I agree with marketing experts, but Apple's probably not the catalyst, selling laptops is.
throwawaycuriou 5y ago
My hunch is that the minds behind Windows 10 being the last Windows have moved on. New blood needs a reason for a promotion.
- Verdex 5y ago
  Or possibly the opposite. Somebody's personal or professional enemy suggested a legitimate reason to go to Windows 11. And they realized that with a few small nudges that would look innocent they could sabotage the entire project and by extension their enemy's career. It could very well be that old timers behind Windows 10 are getting tired of the new blood getting in their way. So they let things progress in a way that would let them stab the Windows 11 people in the back and swoop in to save the day with Windows 12.
  - travisporter 5y ago
    This could be a movie with Dinesh from Silicon Valley as Microsoft’s CEO Edit: ok wait this could be an episode of Silicon Valley although I haven’t see the last season
  - CactusOnFire 5y ago
    It's all just a long-play by the windows 13 people, who will have their revenge as a dish served cold.
    - neuronic 5y ago
      This is a long play by Windows 3.1 developers who introduced hidden code which would execute mid-2021 to release automated marketing messages for "Windows 11" and force update the code base with small time UI changes. During the development of Windows 8 this code was discovered by a select and secret group of people. However, it was impossible to stop the scripts, silently executing on servers which are running in inaccessible concrete enclosures in Redmond since the 90s. Cutting power supply or opening the enclosure to get to these servers would severely damage other critical hardware so they started soft countermeasures. Unaware developers would spread Windows 10 as the "last" Windows release but the operation to mitigate the Windows 11 terror could not be endangered by exposing this information. To avoid global customer confusion, they chose their own strategy to deal with the sudden upgrade to "Windows 11" in 2021. They took the narrative into their own hands and jumped from Windows 8 directly to Windows 10, inventing some plausible story about why Windows 9 was missing. This way, the automated upgrade to Windows 11 could be masqueraded as their own choice
OneTimePetes 5y ago
I think its to gain leverage on internal discussions and meetings. If you generate revenue, you are the defacto master of the product. S/he who pays the bill will have his will. The rolling release can not hide that Windows had internal architecture rot driven by those who paid the bills (add-tech & stasi-spy-department).
sumtechguy 5y ago
Win11 does look rushed. They want TPM2.0 and to move the CPU requirements up about 7 years (which puts more than half of my computers and several family members into EOL with respect to windows). The UI looks like some steps forward and many backwards. I am also thinking this sort of cutting out older harder in this way will make many people re-think if they need a computer or something like an ipad. I think I might upgrade one VM and see. Then leave most of my computers alone for now. It will take them a bit to shake out the quirks on this. It took them about 2 cycles to get win10 into a usable state. Which is fairly typical of them 'wait until service pack 2'.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  >which puts more than half of my computers and several family members into EOL with respect to windows Why? It's not like Windows 10 will suddenly stop working for you. That will keep being supported until 2025 which, at 10 years total, is quite plenty. Sure, you won't get any of the new shiny features of Win 11 but if you're PCs are so old, then you won't need them anyway. Also, feel free to switch you and your family to Linux.
  - sli 5y ago
    > Why? It's not like Windows 10 will suddenly stop working for you. While this is true, Windows 8.1 started to pester me about my hardware constantly on an older (but not old at the time) PC when it was getting towards EOL with an obnoxious popup.
    - nly 5y ago
      Windows 10, as of the October patch Tuesday, is already warning users that their machines are not Windows 11 ready
    - f3d46600-b66e 5y ago
      We have a computer (laptop) from 2011 - Lenovo w520, with 4 core i7 (second gen) and 16GB ram, full hd IPS screen, and factory SSD, and dedicated Nvidia Quadro with 2GB graphic ram. Boy this computer still rocks, and the battery still lasts 2-3 hours. I think there weren't that many advances in raw speed. The only thing it is missing is HEVC hardware decoding (i don't remember if it has h.264, possibly not) What I'm trying to say: 10 years is not that much for computers these day?
easton 5y ago
It's because of two things: OEMs wanted Microsoft to help them sell some new devices (minimum requirements for Windows haven't been raised for the most part for 13 years. If your machine could run Windows 7, Windows 10 worked fine), and because the cancelled Windows 10X project (because every time Microsoft claims they've figured out how to compartmentalize Win32 apps they kill it internally) had a brand new sparkly interface that could be backported without a ton of extra work.
- huzaif 5y ago
  During a global chip shortage?
  - fomine3 5y ago
    I believe 2025 deadline would be the best timing for this push because PC sales will decrease because many people/companies already bought PC in 2020-2022.
AdmiralAsshat 5y ago
Microsoft swears up and down that they never "officially" said that W10 would be "the last version of Windows". [0] Rather, it was said by some developer, which the media took and ran with. Microsoft, for their part, seems to have just smiled and nodded without ever feeling the need to dispel that little hiccup. [0] https://www.pcworld.com/article/394724/why-is-there-a-windows-11-if-windows-10-is-the-last-windows.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/394724/why-is-there-a-window...
- plandis 5y ago
  A Microsoft employee speaking at a Microsoft event is going to be considered an official Microsoft representative. Seems like false advertising that Microsoft didn’t correct the record before it was convenient for them to do so and after a bunch of people had paid for Windows 10 Pro.
  - jaywalk 5y ago
    Windows 11 is a free upgrade for anyone who has Windows 10, so having paid for Windows 10 Pro doesn't really give anyone a right to be angry.
    - seabrookmx 5y ago
      What about if they have a 7th gen Intel chip or first-gen Ryzen, and aren't eligible for that upgrade? Instead of getting Windows 10 support on that hardware indefinitely now they're done in 2025.
      - jaywalk 5y ago
        If anyone purchased Windows 10 assuming it would be supported forever, that mistake is truly on them.
      - fomine3 5y ago
        Anyway no one receive infinite support for hardware. For consumer perspective, Win11 is just rebranded (and upgraded) Win10 because they don't pay for upgrade.
freeone3000 5y ago
The TPM and UEFI upgrade in base requirements led to a version fork. Nothing more.
richrichardsson 5y ago
> I don't get why now they are calling it Windows 11? It could just be a coincidence that macOS went from being version 10 to 11 last year, but it could very well not be.
MR4D 5y ago
Windows 11 purpose is to clear out legacy requirements so that MSFT can streamline development. Obviously they are running into some technical issues while doing this. Frankly, I’m not sure if this is a one-off, or they are just bad at building things cleanly.
- Icathian 5y ago
  Microsoft has plenty of problems, but I don't think anyone can seriously suggest they are bad at building things to last. They shoulder backwards compatibility to a degree that almost no other company would even consider.
  - MR4D 5y ago
    Sorry if I wasn't clear - MSFT is absolutely phenomenal at backwards compatibility, and mad props to them for it. My comment about "building things cleanly" is more about making a clean break from the past. It's not in their DNA, and since Windows 11 is doing that, I expect they'll hit some bumps in the road. As for being a "one-off" issue was whether the bugs resulting from the clean break process are just a few, or if there is a whole host of issues that are about to crop up due to the big changes that have been made. Windows 11 is technically simpler than 10[0], (not sure what the LOC counts are like though), but when changing/removing a bunch of things, I expect they will have issues. It's hard to do when your history is adding things for new features and keeping old code for compatibility - different process & different thinking. [0] - I'm ignoring WSL here as a whole because I'm not familiar with the architecture yet.
    - Icathian 5y ago
      Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, clean breaks like this are definitely new ground for them and you're right that growing pains wouldn't be shocking to see.
2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago
This just has the handwriting of somebody (or a few people) in charge that just wants to put "Launched a major windows version" on his resume to get another promotion: - Rushed - No quality - Regressions - Bugs As you say, there is no apparent technical goal behind Windows 11.
- nobleach 5y ago
  This makes me wonder what use "Launched Windows Vista" would be as a line item on a resume.
  - Dork1234 5y ago
    I built a new computer around Windows Vista and it worked fine. Almost all the issues where related to users installing it on older systems that didn't have drivers (new driver model) or couldn't handle the graphics. Even considering the issues on older hardware, it still was better than the releases of 95/98/XP. Windows 7 didn't have as many issues since the driver model and hardware requirements were similar to Windows Vista. I really consider Windows 7 a Windows Vista Service Pack.
    - giantrobot 5y ago
      > Almost all the issues where related to users installing it on older systems that didn't have drivers (new driver model) or couldn't handle the graphics. This is extremely revisionist. Microsoft did a two-tiered badging program for Vista: Vista Capable and Vista Ready. They originally only had a single tier: Vista Ready. Vista Ready hardware had WDDM drivers, adequate RAM, and capable enough graphics to run Aero. Such hardware could run any version of Vista. Vista Capable badging was introduced later which meant the hardware could only really run Home Basic which didn't support Aero. This badging program was for hardware sold contemporaneously with Vista's lease. Millions of Vista Capable machines were sold that were honestly barely able to run even the Home Basic version of the OS. OEMs ended up having to offer downgrades to XP because of Vista's performance problems. Out of the box it ran slower than XP on the same exact hardware. Lots of third party software ran slower on Vista vs XP. Vista was a terrible release of Windows. People that had problems with it weren't just people with old hardware upgrading. If you ran it on a high end system you probably didn't run into many of its performance issues. It basically brute forces it's way to usability. For many millions of others Vista was a shit show.
Tuna-Fish 5y ago
They want to drop support for a lot of hardware, and can't figure out how to do that without looking really bad while staying as Windows 10. That is really the difference between Win 10 and Win 11: Requirement for UEFI, TPM 2.0 and a CPU that does AVX2 and FMA3, and some kind of hardware-assisted virtualization. UEFI allows them to rewrite their entire bootup codebase with only one target. Literally hundreds of megabytes of sourcecode will be removed from their tree, some of it dating back to the 80's, and replaced with something that is much, much smaller and cleaner. TPM 2.0 and hardware-assisted virtualization allow them to move the kernel one level up in the privilege hierarchy, while properly verifying it during boot to eliminate entire categories of exploits and providing trusted computing that might actually work this time. (Not entirely positive, but it's a desirable feature for them.) And having all the cpus that can support the OS also support the good vector instructions greatly raises the baseline against which most software is compiled. This is an often underlooked point: The benchmarks and the most performance sensitive programs might get multiple code paths or versions for different cpus, but by far the most software made for Win 10 still only targets a very low baseline. Even if it's not 32-bit, most programs only target the ancient SSE2 (!) because that's the baseline that's quaranteed to exist if you have a 64-bit cpu, never mind it's over 20 years old now.
- josefx 5y ago
  > TPM 2.0 and hardware-assisted virtualization allow them to move the kernel one level up in the privilege hierarchy, while properly verifying it during boot to eliminate entire categories of exploits and providing trusted computing that might actually work this time. So Microsoft is going all in with hardware based security while everyone is still recovering from Spectre and Meltdown and dropping in additional layers of software fix CPU security flaws? Is there a betting pool somewhere on how long that will take to backfire?
  - crocodiletears 5y ago
    It won't for them, because they've shifted culpability over to the hardware vendors.
  - ssklash 5y ago
marricks 5y ago
I always figured they stuck with 10 because they wanted to change upgrade cycle/business model, and MacOS is stuck at 10 too so they won’t be “behind.” Then we got MacOS 11 and, well, here we are.
- bombcar 5y ago
  99% of it is this I suspect. And the other 99% is a backlog of "breaking" changes they wanted to implement.
- Joeri 5y ago
  Yup, it makes total sense to me that apple went to 11 so microsoft also had to. Then they probably looked around to see what they could put in a windows 11 and bit off too much. The deadline likely was set in stone from the start, and that’s why it looks like a rush job.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
Wafje 5y ago
So that they could get a lot more media attention compared to just another incremental release.
- ptidhomme 5y ago
  Well yes, it's as simple as that. It doesn't look like you're innovating if you don't change version numbers.
zulban 5y ago
"this is the last version of Windows!" Fun fact: Microsoft never said this. Instead it was picked up by the media somehow and Microsoft simply chose never to correct anyone on it. My source is the Security Now podcast.
- frou_dh 5y ago
  If it's anything like the last time then Bill Gates is going to have to answer questions about "10 ought to be enough for anybody" for decades.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    But hasn't Bill not been in charge for like forever?
    - josefx 5y ago
      He still held an influential position on Microsoft's board until March 2020.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        I like to make fun of Bill as much as the next anti-MS shill, but influential position on the board is not the same as writing the code with a 384k memory limit. Also, how much influence do board members have on code of an OS anyways? All code must be written in Rust type of decisions. You must refactor these 10 lines into a function to be used later kind of decisions? That seems way too boots on the ground for a 30k' view type of position/job description.
- agent327 5y ago
  I'll grant this could be true, but like many I have clear memory of them saying this, and denying it now seems like a bad case of rewriting history in order to save a marginal bit of face. It's like how Bill Gates was never supposed to have said anything about 640K being enough for anyone. So what if he said it? He may be rich and famous, but does that mean he doesn't occasionally say something that seems rather silly in hindsight? I'd respect them more if they just said "yeah, we said it would be the last one, but you know what... We reckon we can do better. This one goes to ELEVEN!" There, that's your marketing done as well, Microsoft. So they changed their minds. Wow, it's almost like they're human beings or something! It wouldn't be nearly as noteworthy as denying it is already proving to be...
stronglikedan 5y ago
I'm glad it's not an update to 10. I simply cannot fathom who at MS thought the taskbar "updates" (regressions) were viable. If they made this just an update to Windows 10, then I would have to be stuck on an old version, because something that I rely on is no longer working correctly.
karmakaze 5y ago
Follow the money. I'm sure that they're revenue dropped since not producing new numbered versions of Windows. Now would be about the time a new version would be coming out. Windows 11 even if it's the same as what you'd get via updates would still mean that they can sell more new licenses and a bunch of upgrades, especially corporate ones down the line.
- karmakaze 5y ago
  Think about it. Windows 10 with indefinite updates is like an iPhone with replaceable battery and ongoing iOS updates.
wnevets 5y ago
>it was all about "this is the last version of Windows!" Supposedly that isn't something Microsoft actually said. A "random member of the press" started that.
dmitriid 5y ago
> I don't get why now they are calling it Windows 11 FOMO looking at Apple? I don't know. Making it slightly whataboutism-ish, the same thing happened with Apple. When Apple transitioned from PoerPC to Intel, they kept 10.x because changing architectures kinda sorta wasn't a big deal for Apple. Same happened with 32bit -> 64bit transition. Same with HFS->APFS transition. It was no big deal. With Mac OS 11 though? It's the same OS that is slowly circling down the drain after years of neglect. The only thing that is different is the new architecture. Which wasn't a big deal 15 years ago, and now for some reason it is. Same thing at Microsoft? "We have to be seen as moving forward with a system we have no idea what to do about"?
benbristow 5y ago
> It is a free upgrade for Windows 10 license holders (consumer anyway, not sure how it works for Enterprise?). I'm using Windows 11 Enterprise and upgraded from Windows 10 Enterprise with no activation prompts etc. (VS/MSDN W10 Enterprise key from work)
divbzero 5y ago
> 6 years ago, with the release of Windows 10, it was all about "this is the last version of Windows!" and they went with the rolling release model. A little strange but they stuck with it for 6 years until suddenly this summer they announce Windows 11 Because in 2020, after many years at 10, macOS bumped its version up to 11. [1] [1]: https://www.apple.com/macos/big-sur/ https://www.apple.com/macos/big-sur/
- hbn 5y ago
  They were still bumping a number, but it was the minor version. But regardless, no one ever really mentioned the numbers. There was a hard announcement of the new OSX/macOS version every year with a flashy new name, first cats, then California locations. I don't think anyone ever considered OSX a rolling release in the same way Windows 10 was.
- jl6 5y ago
  And Debian is also on 11. (GCC too, and, technically, X)
  - bitwize 5y ago
    X11 is deprecated though.
kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
MacOS 11

by _l4jh 5y ago

wolpoli 5y ago

Windows 11 is indeed rushed. Since Apple released MacOS 11, Microsoft needs to release a new version as well. It's obvious[1] that Microsoft took the features made for Windows 10x and glued them into Windows 10. [1]: https://twitter.com/vhanla/status/1434730813183209472 https://twitter.com/vhanla/status/1434730813183209472

mattl 5y ago

Apple was doing Mac OS X forever but then it went to 11 and soon 12 (in reality still Max OS X)

fbelzile 5y ago

Probably some marketing experts thinking that Windows 10 would seem out-of-date now that Apple decided to stop versioning macOS at 10.x forever.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
BoorishBears 5y ago
I was in the same place as the parent comment until I started seeing a blitz of laptop ads after not having seen them for years. Mostly around Windows 11-ready machines. So I agree with marketing experts, but Apple's probably not the catalyst, selling laptops is.

throwawaycuriou 5y ago

My hunch is that the minds behind Windows 10 being the last Windows have moved on. New blood needs a reason for a promotion.

Verdex 5y ago
Or possibly the opposite. Somebody's personal or professional enemy suggested a legitimate reason to go to Windows 11. And they realized that with a few small nudges that would look innocent they could sabotage the entire project and by extension their enemy's career. It could very well be that old timers behind Windows 10 are getting tired of the new blood getting in their way. So they let things progress in a way that would let them stab the Windows 11 people in the back and swoop in to save the day with Windows 12.
- travisporter 5y ago
  This could be a movie with Dinesh from Silicon Valley as Microsoft’s CEO Edit: ok wait this could be an episode of Silicon Valley although I haven’t see the last season
- CactusOnFire 5y ago
  It's all just a long-play by the windows 13 people, who will have their revenge as a dish served cold.
  - neuronic 5y ago
    This is a long play by Windows 3.1 developers who introduced hidden code which would execute mid-2021 to release automated marketing messages for "Windows 11" and force update the code base with small time UI changes. During the development of Windows 8 this code was discovered by a select and secret group of people. However, it was impossible to stop the scripts, silently executing on servers which are running in inaccessible concrete enclosures in Redmond since the 90s. Cutting power supply or opening the enclosure to get to these servers would severely damage other critical hardware so they started soft countermeasures. Unaware developers would spread Windows 10 as the "last" Windows release but the operation to mitigate the Windows 11 terror could not be endangered by exposing this information. To avoid global customer confusion, they chose their own strategy to deal with the sudden upgrade to "Windows 11" in 2021. They took the narrative into their own hands and jumped from Windows 8 directly to Windows 10, inventing some plausible story about why Windows 9 was missing. This way, the automated upgrade to Windows 11 could be masqueraded as their own choice

OneTimePetes 5y ago

I think its to gain leverage on internal discussions and meetings. If you generate revenue, you are the defacto master of the product. S/he who pays the bill will have his will. The rolling release can not hide that Windows had internal architecture rot driven by those who paid the bills (add-tech & stasi-spy-department).

sumtechguy 5y ago

Win11 does look rushed. They want TPM2.0 and to move the CPU requirements up about 7 years (which puts more than half of my computers and several family members into EOL with respect to windows). The UI looks like some steps forward and many backwards. I am also thinking this sort of cutting out older harder in this way will make many people re-think if they need a computer or something like an ipad. I think I might upgrade one VM and see. Then leave most of my computers alone for now. It will take them a bit to shake out the quirks on this. It took them about 2 cycles to get win10 into a usable state. Which is fairly typical of them 'wait until service pack 2'.

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
>which puts more than half of my computers and several family members into EOL with respect to windows Why? It's not like Windows 10 will suddenly stop working for you. That will keep being supported until 2025 which, at 10 years total, is quite plenty. Sure, you won't get any of the new shiny features of Win 11 but if you're PCs are so old, then you won't need them anyway. Also, feel free to switch you and your family to Linux.
- sli 5y ago
  > Why? It's not like Windows 10 will suddenly stop working for you. While this is true, Windows 8.1 started to pester me about my hardware constantly on an older (but not old at the time) PC when it was getting towards EOL with an obnoxious popup.
  - nly 5y ago
    Windows 10, as of the October patch Tuesday, is already warning users that their machines are not Windows 11 ready
  - f3d46600-b66e 5y ago
    We have a computer (laptop) from 2011 - Lenovo w520, with 4 core i7 (second gen) and 16GB ram, full hd IPS screen, and factory SSD, and dedicated Nvidia Quadro with 2GB graphic ram. Boy this computer still rocks, and the battery still lasts 2-3 hours. I think there weren't that many advances in raw speed. The only thing it is missing is HEVC hardware decoding (i don't remember if it has h.264, possibly not) What I'm trying to say: 10 years is not that much for computers these day?

easton 5y ago

It's because of two things: OEMs wanted Microsoft to help them sell some new devices (minimum requirements for Windows haven't been raised for the most part for 13 years. If your machine could run Windows 7, Windows 10 worked fine), and because the cancelled Windows 10X project (because every time Microsoft claims they've figured out how to compartmentalize Win32 apps they kill it internally) had a brand new sparkly interface that could be backported without a ton of extra work.

huzaif 5y ago
During a global chip shortage?
- fomine3 5y ago
  I believe 2025 deadline would be the best timing for this push because PC sales will decrease because many people/companies already bought PC in 2020-2022.

AdmiralAsshat 5y ago

Microsoft swears up and down that they never "officially" said that W10 would be "the last version of Windows". [0] Rather, it was said by some developer, which the media took and ran with. Microsoft, for their part, seems to have just smiled and nodded without ever feeling the need to dispel that little hiccup. [0] https://www.pcworld.com/article/394724/why-is-there-a-windows-11-if-windows-10-is-the-last-windows.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/394724/why-is-there-a-window...

plandis 5y ago
A Microsoft employee speaking at a Microsoft event is going to be considered an official Microsoft representative. Seems like false advertising that Microsoft didn’t correct the record before it was convenient for them to do so and after a bunch of people had paid for Windows 10 Pro.
- jaywalk 5y ago
  Windows 11 is a free upgrade for anyone who has Windows 10, so having paid for Windows 10 Pro doesn't really give anyone a right to be angry.
  - seabrookmx 5y ago
    What about if they have a 7th gen Intel chip or first-gen Ryzen, and aren't eligible for that upgrade? Instead of getting Windows 10 support on that hardware indefinitely now they're done in 2025.
    - jaywalk 5y ago
      If anyone purchased Windows 10 assuming it would be supported forever, that mistake is truly on them.
    - fomine3 5y ago
      Anyway no one receive infinite support for hardware. For consumer perspective, Win11 is just rebranded (and upgraded) Win10 because they don't pay for upgrade.

freeone3000 5y ago

The TPM and UEFI upgrade in base requirements led to a version fork. Nothing more.

richrichardsson 5y ago

> I don't get why now they are calling it Windows 11? It could just be a coincidence that macOS went from being version 10 to 11 last year, but it could very well not be.

MR4D 5y ago

Windows 11 purpose is to clear out legacy requirements so that MSFT can streamline development. Obviously they are running into some technical issues while doing this. Frankly, I’m not sure if this is a one-off, or they are just bad at building things cleanly.

Icathian 5y ago
Microsoft has plenty of problems, but I don't think anyone can seriously suggest they are bad at building things to last. They shoulder backwards compatibility to a degree that almost no other company would even consider.
- MR4D 5y ago
  Sorry if I wasn't clear - MSFT is absolutely phenomenal at backwards compatibility, and mad props to them for it. My comment about "building things cleanly" is more about making a clean break from the past. It's not in their DNA, and since Windows 11 is doing that, I expect they'll hit some bumps in the road. As for being a "one-off" issue was whether the bugs resulting from the clean break process are just a few, or if there is a whole host of issues that are about to crop up due to the big changes that have been made. Windows 11 is technically simpler than 10[0], (not sure what the LOC counts are like though), but when changing/removing a bunch of things, I expect they will have issues. It's hard to do when your history is adding things for new features and keeping old code for compatibility - different process & different thinking. [0] - I'm ignoring WSL here as a whole because I'm not familiar with the architecture yet.
  - Icathian 5y ago
    Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, clean breaks like this are definitely new ground for them and you're right that growing pains wouldn't be shocking to see.

2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago

This just has the handwriting of somebody (or a few people) in charge that just wants to put "Launched a major windows version" on his resume to get another promotion: - Rushed - No quality - Regressions - Bugs As you say, there is no apparent technical goal behind Windows 11.

nobleach 5y ago
This makes me wonder what use "Launched Windows Vista" would be as a line item on a resume.
- Dork1234 5y ago
  I built a new computer around Windows Vista and it worked fine. Almost all the issues where related to users installing it on older systems that didn't have drivers (new driver model) or couldn't handle the graphics. Even considering the issues on older hardware, it still was better than the releases of 95/98/XP. Windows 7 didn't have as many issues since the driver model and hardware requirements were similar to Windows Vista. I really consider Windows 7 a Windows Vista Service Pack.
  - giantrobot 5y ago
    > Almost all the issues where related to users installing it on older systems that didn't have drivers (new driver model) or couldn't handle the graphics. This is extremely revisionist. Microsoft did a two-tiered badging program for Vista: Vista Capable and Vista Ready. They originally only had a single tier: Vista Ready. Vista Ready hardware had WDDM drivers, adequate RAM, and capable enough graphics to run Aero. Such hardware could run any version of Vista. Vista Capable badging was introduced later which meant the hardware could only really run Home Basic which didn't support Aero. This badging program was for hardware sold contemporaneously with Vista's lease. Millions of Vista Capable machines were sold that were honestly barely able to run even the Home Basic version of the OS. OEMs ended up having to offer downgrades to XP because of Vista's performance problems. Out of the box it ran slower than XP on the same exact hardware. Lots of third party software ran slower on Vista vs XP. Vista was a terrible release of Windows. People that had problems with it weren't just people with old hardware upgrading. If you ran it on a high end system you probably didn't run into many of its performance issues. It basically brute forces it's way to usability. For many millions of others Vista was a shit show.

Tuna-Fish 5y ago

They want to drop support for a lot of hardware, and can't figure out how to do that without looking really bad while staying as Windows 10. That is really the difference between Win 10 and Win 11: Requirement for UEFI, TPM 2.0 and a CPU that does AVX2 and FMA3, and some kind of hardware-assisted virtualization. UEFI allows them to rewrite their entire bootup codebase with only one target. Literally hundreds of megabytes of sourcecode will be removed from their tree, some of it dating back to the 80's, and replaced with something that is much, much smaller and cleaner. TPM 2.0 and hardware-assisted virtualization allow them to move the kernel one level up in the privilege hierarchy, while properly verifying it during boot to eliminate entire categories of exploits and providing trusted computing that might actually work this time. (Not entirely positive, but it's a desirable feature for them.) And having all the cpus that can support the OS also support the good vector instructions greatly raises the baseline against which most software is compiled. This is an often underlooked point: The benchmarks and the most performance sensitive programs might get multiple code paths or versions for different cpus, but by far the most software made for Win 10 still only targets a very low baseline. Even if it's not 32-bit, most programs only target the ancient SSE2 (!) because that's the baseline that's quaranteed to exist if you have a 64-bit cpu, never mind it's over 20 years old now.

josefx 5y ago
> TPM 2.0 and hardware-assisted virtualization allow them to move the kernel one level up in the privilege hierarchy, while properly verifying it during boot to eliminate entire categories of exploits and providing trusted computing that might actually work this time. So Microsoft is going all in with hardware based security while everyone is still recovering from Spectre and Meltdown and dropping in additional layers of software fix CPU security flaws? Is there a betting pool somewhere on how long that will take to backfire?
- crocodiletears 5y ago
  It won't for them, because they've shifted culpability over to the hardware vendors.
- ssklash 5y ago

marricks 5y ago

I always figured they stuck with 10 because they wanted to change upgrade cycle/business model, and MacOS is stuck at 10 too so they won’t be “behind.” Then we got MacOS 11 and, well, here we are.

bombcar 5y ago
99% of it is this I suspect. And the other 99% is a backlog of "breaking" changes they wanted to implement.
Joeri 5y ago
Yup, it makes total sense to me that apple went to 11 so microsoft also had to. Then they probably looked around to see what they could put in a windows 11 and bit off too much. The deadline likely was set in stone from the start, and that’s why it looks like a rush job.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

Wafje 5y ago

So that they could get a lot more media attention compared to just another incremental release.

ptidhomme 5y ago
Well yes, it's as simple as that. It doesn't look like you're innovating if you don't change version numbers.

zulban 5y ago

"this is the last version of Windows!" Fun fact: Microsoft never said this. Instead it was picked up by the media somehow and Microsoft simply chose never to correct anyone on it. My source is the Security Now podcast.

frou_dh 5y ago
If it's anything like the last time then Bill Gates is going to have to answer questions about "10 ought to be enough for anybody" for decades.
- dylan604 5y ago
  But hasn't Bill not been in charge for like forever?
  - josefx 5y ago
    He still held an influential position on Microsoft's board until March 2020.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      I like to make fun of Bill as much as the next anti-MS shill, but influential position on the board is not the same as writing the code with a 384k memory limit. Also, how much influence do board members have on code of an OS anyways? All code must be written in Rust type of decisions. You must refactor these 10 lines into a function to be used later kind of decisions? That seems way too boots on the ground for a 30k' view type of position/job description.
agent327 5y ago
I'll grant this could be true, but like many I have clear memory of them saying this, and denying it now seems like a bad case of rewriting history in order to save a marginal bit of face. It's like how Bill Gates was never supposed to have said anything about 640K being enough for anyone. So what if he said it? He may be rich and famous, but does that mean he doesn't occasionally say something that seems rather silly in hindsight? I'd respect them more if they just said "yeah, we said it would be the last one, but you know what... We reckon we can do better. This one goes to ELEVEN!" There, that's your marketing done as well, Microsoft. So they changed their minds. Wow, it's almost like they're human beings or something! It wouldn't be nearly as noteworthy as denying it is already proving to be...

stronglikedan 5y ago

I'm glad it's not an update to 10. I simply cannot fathom who at MS thought the taskbar "updates" (regressions) were viable. If they made this just an update to Windows 10, then I would have to be stuck on an old version, because something that I rely on is no longer working correctly.

karmakaze 5y ago

Follow the money. I'm sure that they're revenue dropped since not producing new numbered versions of Windows. Now would be about the time a new version would be coming out. Windows 11 even if it's the same as what you'd get via updates would still mean that they can sell more new licenses and a bunch of upgrades, especially corporate ones down the line.

karmakaze 5y ago
Think about it. Windows 10 with indefinite updates is like an iPhone with replaceable battery and ongoing iOS updates.

wnevets 5y ago

>it was all about "this is the last version of Windows!" Supposedly that isn't something Microsoft actually said. A "random member of the press" started that.

dmitriid 5y ago

> I don't get why now they are calling it Windows 11 FOMO looking at Apple? I don't know. Making it slightly whataboutism-ish, the same thing happened with Apple. When Apple transitioned from PoerPC to Intel, they kept 10.x because changing architectures kinda sorta wasn't a big deal for Apple. Same happened with 32bit -> 64bit transition. Same with HFS->APFS transition. It was no big deal. With Mac OS 11 though? It's the same OS that is slowly circling down the drain after years of neglect. The only thing that is different is the new architecture. Which wasn't a big deal 15 years ago, and now for some reason it is. Same thing at Microsoft? "We have to be seen as moving forward with a system we have no idea what to do about"?

benbristow 5y ago

> It is a free upgrade for Windows 10 license holders (consumer anyway, not sure how it works for Enterprise?). I'm using Windows 11 Enterprise and upgraded from Windows 10 Enterprise with no activation prompts etc. (VS/MSDN W10 Enterprise key from work)

divbzero 5y ago

> 6 years ago, with the release of Windows 10, it was all about "this is the last version of Windows!" and they went with the rolling release model. A little strange but they stuck with it for 6 years until suddenly this summer they announce Windows 11 Because in 2020, after many years at 10, macOS bumped its version up to 11. [1] [1]: https://www.apple.com/macos/big-sur/ https://www.apple.com/macos/big-sur/

hbn 5y ago
They were still bumping a number, but it was the minor version. But regardless, no one ever really mentioned the numbers. There was a hard announcement of the new OSX/macOS version every year with a flashy new name, first cats, then California locations. I don't think anyone ever considered OSX a rolling release in the same way Windows 10 was.
jl6 5y ago
And Debian is also on 11. (GCC too, and, technically, X)
- bitwize 5y ago
  X11 is deprecated though.

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago

MacOS 11