Update on Windows 11 minimum system requirements

Hazel123 · Jul 3, 2021

Yep 2025 before Windows 10 support ends. And they might extend it? I think the thing is - it's quite clever. People WANT to try the new Windows 11 and run it and not have to buy a new computer. It's there - it's like a temptation. Rather than waiting four years with it there already! It's a kind of pschological reaction that no doubt marketeers are aware of. The other psychological thing is "only four years"! That means only three years really before you have to get organised for change - so why not just get it over with. It is all very tempting for us and makes us impatient. We can't see what it's like unless we have it. The average user isn't going to want to try running it virtually or editing distros etc. So they may just sell their Windows 10 machine now (while it's still worth something, which it won't be when it's near end of life) and get a new one. So yes clever marketing. But also human psychology!

sgage · Jul 3, 2021

Hazel123 said:
Yep 2025 before Windows 10 support ends. And they might extend it? I think the thing is - it's quite clever. People WANT to try the new Windows 11 and run it and not have to buy a new computer. It's there - it's like a temptation. Rather than waiting four years with it there already! It's a kind of pschological reaction that no doubt marketeers are aware of. The other psychological thing is "only four years"! That means only three years really before you have to get organised for change - so why not just get it over with. It is all very tempting for us and makes us impatient. We can't see what it's like unless we have it. The average user isn't going to want to try running it virtually or editing distros etc. So they may just sell their Windows 10 machine now (while it's still worth something, which it won't be when it's near end of life) and get a new one. So yes clever marketing. But also human psychology!

Clever marketing IS applied human psychology. :wink:

johnlgalt · Jul 3, 2021

Exactly. Going crazy over an as-yet-unreleased OS is simply a waste of both your emotional and intellectual serenity.

It's a shame people cannot just take a chill pill and sit back and relax, knowing full well that the systems they are currently using right now with Windows 10 won't magically be obsolete tomorrow.

I've bandied about the Oct 2025 date numerous times - and so have many, many other people. But the angst at the whole mentality of 'being forced' to do anything is pure drivel - no one is forced to do anything wrt Win11 and your current machine.

If Microsoft had said Windows 10 support was ending in 2021 I could understand a large amount of anguish. But complaining about something that is not mandatory for at least 4 years from now (and that is not counting the ability to continue to use 10, and use other OSs as well, beyond that....)

Just ... wow.

larc919 · Jul 3, 2021

^^^
This! 11 is nowhere near being a finished product. I admit I don't much like what I'm seeing so far, but all that could change. Maybe drastically. That's why Microsoft has the DEV Channel.

Hazel123 · Jul 3, 2021

I think my feeling is - yes I'll carry on using Windows 10 for now. On my ancient, fast laptop :) But whereas before it was the latest and "only" option there is now the niggling feeling I am missing out on something newer lol. And an "end date" always sounds very final and takes away that feeling of ongoing continuity. I will definitely find a spare computer to play around with Windows 11.

And there is the financial aspect as well. If I sold my laptop now with up to date Windows 10 on, I could get a reasonable sum to put towards a new one. (Not very much with this laptop but it would be half that when Windows 10 is due to expire).

WXC · Jul 3, 2021

Hazel123 said:
Yep 2025 before Windows 10 support ends. And they might extend it? I think the thing is - it's quite clever. People WANT to try the new Windows 11 and run it and not have to buy a new computer. It's there - it's like a temptation. Rather than waiting four years with it there already! It's a kind of pschological reaction that no doubt marketeers are aware of. The other psychological thing is "only four years"! That means only three years really before you have to get organised for change - so why not just get it over with. It is all very tempting for us and makes us impatient. We can't see what it's like unless we have it. The average user isn't going to want to try running it virtually or editing distros etc. So they may just sell their Windows 10 machine now (while it's still worth something, which it won't be when it's near end of life) and get a new one. So yes clever marketing. But also human psychology!

sgage said:
Clever marketing IS applied human psychology.

I agree, on both counts.

i486 · Jul 3, 2021

sgage said:
And the expectation that new versions of Windows should support old hardware into perpetuity. And when those expectations aren't met, a chorus of hysterical, breathless, spluttering outrage - really over the top in some cases. That's what I meant by 'entitled'.

I don't expect future Windows versions to officially support antique hardware, but unless there is a very good reason which Microsoft makes public, Windows installers shouldn't prevent users from installing them at their own risk.

So why the sudden change now, that's a good question. Is it tightened security for enterprises that requires Microsoft to restrict private users this way? I'm sure that that reasoning would be more marketable than the other one, true or not. Let's consider the enviromental aspect as well. It's something that everyone, including businesses, are supposed to take into account. Some say that older computer's lifecycles can be extended by sticking with out of date Windows versions, or even by installing Linux. Why does the enviromental responsibility always rest on the consumer, never on the businesses? Why should they get away with planned obsolescence?

CountMike · Jul 4, 2021

i486 said:
I don't expect future Windows versions to officially support antique hardware, but unless there is a very good reason which Microsoft makes public, Windows installers shouldn't prevent users from installing them at their own risk.

So why the sudden change now, that's a good question. Is it tightened security for enterprises that requires Microsoft to restrict private users this way? I'm sure that that reasoning would be more marketable than the other one, true or not. Let's consider the enviromental aspect as well. It's something that everyone, including businesses, are supposed to take into account. Some say that older computer's lifecycles can be extended by sticking with out of date Windows versions, or even by installing Linux. Why does the enviromental responsibility always rest on the consumer, never on the businesses? Why should they get away with planned obsolescence?

It must be security reasons, Intel keeps on patching microcode for various security flaws and AMD keeps on pumping new CPU and GPU models.
Except for very selected group of users, PC performance is of lesser importance, large jumps comes only some 10 years or more. For mundane tasks like book keeping, as terminals or just internet work. performance improvement is usually undetectable, OS and changes in programs/applications is more of a concern. OS itself is much lesser part of cost (in time and money) than very often custom made expensive programs that may loose compatibility with previous Windows version and have to be re-written and payed all over again and with it education to used them with largely (computer wise) unskilled operators.

jimbo45 · Jul 4, 2021

Hi folks
In any case these older machines as I've posted elsewhere are excellent for learning --you don't need the greatest and latest to learn a bit about the basic components of any OS - Any OS from huge Mainframes to a small PC will have these basic components : a Task scheduler / dispatcher, memory manager, a Kernel, a GUI (if something like Windows), an I/O interface and a hardware interrupt system (necessary e.g for keyboard / mouse input -- you can't have an OS running around forever checking whether a user has entered anything !!!!). Simple programming tasks can be learned as well as basic Internet . These old machines can be used for NAS's quite efficiently as well or just donate to charity / schools in poor areas / 3rd world countries.

I get a bit sick of all "The environmental Lobbying" that's going on at the moment -- I am in probably in one of the most environmentally conscious countries in the world and sensible non polluting "anti plastic and climate change" measures are what's needed - not a load of Bovine Scatology coming from people who should know better because they can garner a few votes from some of their younger more extreme people.

Old computers can be sensibly disposed of without sending to landfill -- any computer bought even as long as 6 years ago will probably work for at least another 6 years.

Cheers
jimbo

CountMike · Jul 4, 2021

jimbo45 said:
Hi folks
In any case these older machines as I've posted elsewhere are excellent for learning --you don't need the greatest and latest to learn a bit about the basic components of any OS - Any OS from huge Mainframes to a small PC will have these basic components : a Task scheduler / dispatcher, memory manager, a Kernel, a GUI (if something like Windows), an I/O interface and a hardware interrupt system (necessary e.g for keyboard / mouse input -- you can't have an OS running around forever checking whether a user has entered anything !!!!). Simple programming tasks can be learned as well as basic Internet . These old machines can be used for NAS's quite efficiently as well or just donate to charity / schools in poor areas / 3rd world countries.

I get a bit sick of all "The environmental Lobbying" that's going on at the moment -- I am in probably in one of the most environmentally conscious countries in the world and sensible non polluting "anti plastic and climate change" measures are what's needed - not a load of Bovine Scatology coming from people who should know better because they can garner a few votes from some of their younger more extreme people.

Old computers can be sensibly disposed of without sending to landfill -- any computer bought even as long as 6 years ago will probably work for at least another 6 years.

Cheers
jimbo

Land fills are last place to find PCs and advanced devices on. Everything is highly recyclable including gold and other precious metals in components, organized in many countries and picked by poor people in others. Few years ago I sold to recyclers large bunch of old and unusable MBs, GPUs PSUs etc. that I changed for others and hoarded in the basement, made 300€ on them. There are even some Roma (Gypsies) that specialize in electronics refuse collecting and recycling.
Others I fixed and gave to some kids in the neighborhood or friends that couldn't afford new ones.

sgage · Jul 4, 2021

i486 said:
I don't expect future Windows versions to officially support antique hardware, but unless there is a very good reason which Microsoft makes public, Windows installers shouldn't prevent users from installing them at their own risk.

So why the sudden change now, that's a good question. Is it tightened security for enterprises that requires Microsoft to restrict private users this way? I'm sure that that reasoning would be more marketable than the other one, true or not. Let's consider the enviromental aspect as well. It's something that everyone, including businesses, are supposed to take into account. Some say that older computer's lifecycles can be extended by sticking with out of date Windows versions, or even by installing Linux. Why does the enviromental responsibility always rest on the consumer, never on the businesses? Why should they get away with planned obsolescence?

MS does not need to give a very good reason for preventing installers from installing their alpha software - what gave you that idea? It's not a public utility. It's proprietary, way pre-release code, and MS can decide who gets it based on whatever. Back in the old days, you didn't get pre-release code from MS (or any proprietary company) unless you met some criteria of 'need to know', signed NDA's, or even paid for it.

I don't think the environment enters into it for MS one way or the other. As for planned obsolescence, perhaps you haven't noticed that this is how Industrial Capitalism has worked, for everyone, since the 1920's, if not earlier. In any case, Windows 10 will carry on for a good long time, so no need to ditch any hardware.

swarfega · Jul 4, 2021

jimbo45 said:
Hi folks
In any case these older machines as I've posted elsewhere are excellent for learning --you don't need the greatest and latest to learn a bit about the basic components of any OS - Any OS from huge Mainframes to a small PC will have these basic components : a Task scheduler / dispatcher, memory manager, a Kernel, a GUI (if something like Windows), an I/O interface and a hardware interrupt system (necessary e.g for keyboard / mouse input -- you can't have an OS running around forever checking whether a user has entered anything !!!!). Simple programming tasks can be learned as well as basic Internet . These old machines can be used for NAS's quite efficiently as well or just donate to charity / schools in poor areas / 3rd world countries.

I get a bit sick of all "The environmental Lobbying" that's going on at the moment -- I am in probably in one of the most environmentally conscious countries in the world and sensible non polluting "anti plastic and climate change" measures are what's needed - not a load of Bovine Scatology coming from people who should know better because they can garner a few votes from some of their younger more extreme people.

Old computers can be sensibly disposed of without sending to landfill -- any computer bought even as long as 6 years ago will probably work for at least another 6 years.

Cheers
jimbo

There's a company near me who take old computers and either dispose of it responsibly or refurbish them.

Bastet · Jul 4, 2021

There’s some hints that Microsoft may drop the cpu minimum requirements to include 6th gen processors:

Microsoft May Drop Windows 11 CPU Requirements to Intel 6th Gen Skylake Processors

Microsoft’s original requirements for Windows 11 included a minimum of 8th Gen Coffee Lake processors on Intel’s side and the 2nd Gen Ryzen processors on AMD’s end. As already reported, this was an unpleasant surprise for many as a lot of users are running Windows 10 on the 1st Gen Ryzen and the...

www.hardwaretimes.com

sgage · Jul 4, 2021

Bastet said:
There’s some hints that Microsoft may drop the cpu minimum requirements to include 6th gen processors:

Microsoft May Drop Windows 11 CPU Requirements to Intel 6th Gen Skylake Processors

Microsoft’s original requirements for Windows 11 included a minimum of 8th Gen Coffee Lake processors on Intel’s side and the 2nd Gen Ryzen processors on AMD’s end. As already reported, this was an unpleasant surprise for many as a lot of users are running Windows 10 on the 1st Gen Ryzen and the...

www.hardwaretimes.com

There has been a message on my Insiders page to the effect that my machine didn't qualify, might have problems, blah blah blah. That message is gone now...

Bree · Jul 4, 2021

That would be welcome, it would put my total of compatible machines up by one. At present none of my half-dozen laptops are deemed as compatible.

Dark Knight · Jul 4, 2021

sgage said:
There has been a message on my Insiders page to the effect that my machine didn't qualify, might have problems, blah blah blah. That message is gone now...

Well Yeah , since I am running a 6th gen sky lake cpu and Windows 11 and really see no degradation at all.

johnlgalt · Jul 4, 2021

It's not about degradation. It's not about performance, either.

It's 100% about security (and smoke and mirrors to make it seem like Microsoft is 'really doing something extraordinary' by limiting CPUs with a past history of vulnerabilities).

Problem is, though, that if people tried to take the same approach to software, well, Microsoft would quickly lose it's $2 Trillion USD status - because their software is, arguably, even more vulnerable (over the long run) than these CPUs they are marking as excluded.

But remember - these games are not for you, the end user. They are for the investors and the large scale buyers and their high end cloud consumers.

You (and me,) they could really not care any less for. Regardless of what they may say otherwise.

If you were a business owner, a sole proprietor, you might think twice before bumping a customer you have that fills an order for $20 to accommodate a customer that comes into fill a $2000 order. Corps aren't so nice - the higher paying job almost always gets the deal first. That is what Capitalism has become today - not the search for a little bit of a profit as a RoI but the search for a profit by cutting corners, shoddy workmanship and practices, and the like.

And I'm not trying to turn this into a political discussion - it's the flat out truth. If you think for one second that Microsoft implements anything because the end users want it you're sadly mistaken. They only implement it if it has a positive reaction with their investors. Make no mistake - Microsoft is not a 'mom and pop' store fulfilling orders from $20 to $2000. They are a full-on corporation, with investors, earnings reports, margins and things like that. All the other stuff about how well it will help the users blah blah blah is nothing but marketing.

exploder · Jul 4, 2021

@ Bastet

I think they will end up lowering the requirements to anything 64 bit that is currently running Windows 10. Windows 11 installed on my Precision T3610 with no warnings or issues. I can completely understand doing away with the 32 bit versions, it is a complete waste of their time and resources. Microsoft has a huge user base globally and not everyone can just run out and purchase new hardware.

I seriously doubt they want another ME, Vista or Windows 8 on their hands. I think they want to break this cycle. They put a lot of work into the UI, the CEO appears very pleased with it too. The original requirements seem more reasonable for a future release beyond Windows 11. There are just too many reasons for not applying them at this time.

Windows 11 is built off of Windows 10. We already know it can run on older hardware and Microsoft is well aware of this. Microsoft under it's current leadership has made great strides in improving their public image. I can't see them releasing Windows 11 with it's original requirements and ruining all that. I think they want a lot of positive press with the new release.

The leaked version was no accident, it was to build excitement and good press. Microsoft would come out shining by relaxing the requirements. Secure Boot, TPM 1.2 and a 64 bit processor would be much more realistic in my opinion.

Just an observation but I noticed too that it is still possible to revert to the menu Windows 10 uses. Windows user's have made it quite clear after Windows 8 that they are not happy with their start menu being messed with. I have to wonder if Microsoft has concerns about the new menu that Windows 11 uses out of the box. It's not as drastic a change but I still think public pressure could be a factor here.

I noticed that most of the reputable tech sites are not saying much about the system requirements. They are awful quiet about it considering how many it would impact. They often get inside information they can not reveal to the public. In my opinion there are enough indications that the system requirements will be relaxed and most will get the upgrade without issues.

Microsoft could easily put themselves in the spotlight, get some great press, keep their user bas happy and I think that's very likely what they have in mind.

johnlgalt · Jul 4, 2021

Nope - My Core i7 965 EE (1st gen Bloomfield CPU) is fully 64bit and easily runs Windows 10.

So, no, they won't go to that extent.

jen1 · Jul 4, 2021

i486 said:
And stepping 9 is supposed to make 7th and 8th secure enough for Windows 11? Explain how, the burden of proof is on you. For reference, there are some much older architectures that share stepping 9 with those two, and based on that table it seems like knowing the stepping is only useful in finding the correct microcode image for your CPU.

Both 7th and 8th must rely on firmware and software patches to become fully(?) protected against Spectre and Meltdown variants, just like the 6th. That same table proves that. Intel did not make changes to their architectures while they were still being manufactured, so the support rests mostly on Microsoft now that the motherboard manufacturers are starting to drop support for their older models. Are you saying that those microcode fixes distributed by Intel & Microsoft can make the 7th and 8th generation Intel CPUs more secure than the 6th? Why didn't you say so earlier.

And yes I do have a Skylake platform, so I'm rightfully pissed off at Microsoft. I don't need to know how the "new & improved" products are better than the old one I have, I only need to know why Windows 11 needs the newer ones. Microsoft doesn't have to communicate these things to the public, but their silence breaks what little trust there's between them and their customers.

I am not saying the 6th gen should not be supported, in fact I have said before that the 6th gen should be fine.

I am just saying that the 6th gen is different from the 7th and the 8th gen, and the 7th and 8th gen are the same, that is what all I said.

In my feed back to Microsoft I have said that all the security vulnerabilities in the 6the gen have be mitigated, and I hope they will add it too.

In my opinion, all users should update without limitation, but I am guessing Microsoft want to remove functions that only supported by old hardware, which I think is fine, if this is the case the 6th gen should be supported as well imho.