this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
314 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

58833 readers
4390 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Defaced@lemmy.world 47 points 1 day ago (5 children)

If there was ever a time for valve to push advertising out for the steam deck and steamOS it's now. The final piece of the gaming puzzle is anticheat. If valve gets the proprietary anticheat makers on board then it's all over. Every major hurdle would've been overcome, but games like valorant and call of duty still don't work because of vanguard and ricochet.

With how terrible windows handhelds are, imagine how awesome it would be for those cod players to be able to play a round of warzone on the toilet? I joke, but seriously, that's the demographic that needs to adopt a platform like the steam deck. That's the barrier valve has to overcome, and I'm worried they just don't care or something even more legally gray is happening, like Microsoft giving game devs incentive to use proprietary anticheat or to just not flip that EAC flag in their code.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 16 points 1 day ago

That problem is that there isn't a better version (not that it was peak in the first place anyway..)

[–] Magister@lemmy.world 64 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I know it's not a hardware compatibility problem. People just don't want ads/tracking/AI bullshit, a removed control panel, settings that are hard to find/hidden, etc.

All intel processor 8th gen+ (and even some 7th gen IIRC) are win11 compatible, motherboard have TPM2 for years, even my intel 6th gen MB have TPM2.0.

Next year the intel 8th gen will have 8 years, people have PC/laptop more recent than that. Problem is that win10 will not get security updates and all.

I'm using MX Linux BTW.

[–] zerofk@lemm.ee 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

My 80+ year old parents don’t care about ads or AI. They just want a working PC, and W11 won’t install on the cheap machine they got a few years ago. They’re not going to buy a new one because this works perfectly fine.

And yes they tried Linux for several years, but went back to Windows because it was just too much hassle and not compatible with too many things.

It absolutely is a hardware problem.

[–] n2burns@lemmy.ca 32 points 1 day ago

It's not a hardware compatibility problem for you or people who have reasonably new computers. However, for the last decade or so, computers have kind of stagnated and old computers are still very functional, something I couldn't have said a decade or two ago.

I'm typing this on a ThinkPad x201 which was released in 2010. TBF, I've updated it as much as I can (8GB of RAM and an SSD), it's running Linux Mint because Windows drags, and even then it's getting tired.

My Spouse's laptop is an Acer with a 5th gen i3. A couple years ago, she was complaining it was getting a bit slow, so I threw an SSD in it and now she's happy with how it runs Windows 10, and I'm sure it would run Windows 11 fine if a TPM2.0 chip wasn't required.

It's forced obsolesces for a hardware requirement most home users are never going to use.

[–] CommanderShepard@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

Most people don't care or even know that it is AI/ad-infested. I've seen people just fighting through pop-up on multiple websites they use. When ci fronted by me, they just said that they have "tunnel vision" and don't care.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Many years ago, I attended a Windows XP launch event. The Microsoft presenter had the perfect line to describe how MS views this:
"Why should you upgrade to Windows XP? Because we're going to stop supporting Windows 98!"

This was said completely unironically and with the expectation that people would just do what MS wanted them to do. That attitude hasn't changed in the years since. Win 10 is going to be left behind. You will either upgrade or be vulnerable. Also, MS doesn't care about the home users, they care about the businesses and the money to be had. And businesses will upgrade. They will invariably wait to the last minute and then scramble to get it done. But, whether because they actually give a shit about security or they have to comply with security frameworks (SOX, HIPAA, etc.), they will upgrade. Sure, they will insist on GPOs to disable 90% of the Ads and tracking shit, but they will upgrade.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because we're going to stop supporting Windows 98!

At least there was a technical reason there, that Microsoft was merging the two separate codebases for consumer Windows and enterprise Windows, and building on the better NT codebase than the 95->98->ME codebase.

And XP was actually way better for the main thing that we were going to be using computers for going forward: networked with the actual internet.

Windows 11? Can't see any paradigm shift in how the operating system itself is supposed to work, at least not on anything that actually makes a difference in a favorable way.

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

Ya, in fairness to MS, Windows XP was a good release (post SP1, like most "good" MS releases). But, the fact is that MS is going to push the latest version, regardless of how ready it is for use. MS was hot for folks to switch to Windows ME. And holy fuck was that a terrible OS. MS also did everything short of bribery to get folks to switch to Vista (anyone remember Windows Mojave?). The "upgrade, or else" mantra has always been their way. Not that I blame them too much, it does need to happen. It just sucks when the reason for the new OS is more intrusive ads and user tracking.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Probably a lower adoption rate than Vista

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The author asks many questions, but never the most important one: "Why don't people like Windows 11?"

[–] Demdaru@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Why would he? Anybody intersted already knows, rest doesn't give a flying duck.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

obligatory 🐧 that must be in every thread

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

hahahahahah does anyone really think microsoft cares? their money is in business with all the big players already deploying 11 at least in modest amounts.

nothing stopped them when windows7 was still functional and they were pushing the tpm requirement, i dont see a difference here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Upsidedownturtle@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd guess that major UI revisions are a big reason for average users. People don't like having to relearn how to do something or find a setting. If M$ implemented a legacy UI setting that by and large mimicked the interface and controls in W10 they'd clear a major hurdle preventing less technologically inclined users from upgrading.

[–] krippix@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago

My guess is that the average user doesn't care at all and just clicks away update notifications because they are annoyed by them

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›