Why is Microsoft trying to shoehorn us into Windows 11?

[Michaelsoft_Binbows]

Why are they trying so hard to get us into 11 when they are eliminating like 55% of their userbase? Around 55% of machines on Windows 10 cannot make the switch because of the hardware requirements. From what I've seen its a massive resource hog and isn't even any better than 10.

 

[llillilll]

Why are they trying so hard to get us into 11 when they are eliminating like 55% of their userbase? Around 55% of machines on Windows 10 cannot make the switch because of the hardware requirements. From what I've seen its a massive resource hog and isn't even any better than 10.

That is because windows isn't your friend and they don't give a shit about their userbase. They force people to use their newest OS that has higher hardware requirements soo the tech illiterate buy newer computers.
Microshit increases hardware requirements for their OS in exchange of manifucturers installing windows as the default OS for prebuilds and laptops.
The good old days of Windows were just when windows was trying to gain market dominance, btw.

 

[Ashman]

So can they can push more garbage. I am actually looking towards 2025 because it means a ton of free hardware for me.

 

[pickleman]

A lot of these companies are basically whales in the ocean. The people working them work only on small components on any of the small selection of products. They get high salaries as well.

The high level VPs are big chilling, and I highly doubt they actually care about their users. Ultimately the engineers will implement what their managers tell them to do. There is a heirarchy, an engineers manager would be another couple managers before you get to the VPs. Same with the designers.

These larger companies are like little communist states where everything is essentially froozen. Sure you can get team of a couple thousand to release a product every so often, but this is a process of high friction.

When a couple people in the thousands take issue with a UI component, its hard to hear them beyond the layers of communist brained people who worship their statesmen. "Dear leader wanted something like this...". In higher ranks of management, pay is way higher and the politics are more aggressive. "oh you dont want to implement a UI feature which makes us money?". You start to look bad for suggesting start menu ads are bad for the user experience.

Big companies start to become communist because their leaders are well well paid and their loyal followers are better off then the rest. Microsoft is a Publically listed company, that means they are collectively owned by the working class. So it fits the definition. The bigger they get the less consequences for their actions... that is until the entire state fails.

When microsoft fails theyll leave a vaccum in the desktop os space

 

[llillilll]

A lot of these companies are basically whales in the ocean. The people working them work only on small components on any of the small selection of products. They get high salaries as well.

The high level VPs are big chilling, and I highly doubt they actually care about their users. Ultimately the engineers will implement what their managers tell them to do. There is a heirarchy, an engineers manager would be another couple managers before you get to the VPs. Same with the designers.

These larger companies are like little communist states where everything is essentially froozen. Sure you can get team of a couple thousand to release a product every so often, but this is a process of high friction.

When a couple people in the thousands take issue with a UI component, its hard to hear them beyond the layers of communist brained people who worship their statesmen. "Dear leader wanted something like this...". In higher ranks of management, pay is way higher and the politics are more aggressive. "oh you dont want to implement a UI feature which makes us money?". You start to look bad for suggesting start menu ads are bad for the user experience.

Big companies start to become communist because their leaders are well well paid and their loyal followers are better off then the rest. Microsoft is a Publically listed company, that means they are collectively owned by the working class. So it fits the definition. The bigger they get the less consequences for their actions... that is until the entire state fails.

When microsoft fails theyll leave a vaccum in the desktop os space

One of the Wrongest takes on all of agora.
Megs corporations aren't bad because they are communists, they are bad because they are megacorporations under capitalism FYI

 

[Michaelsoft_Binbows]

A lot of these companies are basically whales in the ocean. The people working them work only on small components on any of the small selection of products. They get high salaries as well.

The high level VPs are big chilling, and I highly doubt they actually care about their users. Ultimately the engineers will implement what their managers tell them to do. There is a heirarchy, an engineers manager would be another couple managers before you get to the VPs. Same with the designers.

These larger companies are like little communist states where everything is essentially froozen. Sure you can get team of a couple thousand to release a product every so often, but this is a process of high friction.

When a couple people in the thousands take issue with a UI component, its hard to hear them beyond the layers of communist brained people who worship their statesmen. "Dear leader wanted something like this...". In higher ranks of management, pay is way higher and the politics are more aggressive. "oh you dont want to implement a UI feature which makes us money?". You start to look bad for suggesting start menu ads are bad for the user experience.

Big companies start to become communist because their leaders are well well paid and their loyal followers are better off then the rest. Microsoft is a Publically listed company, that means they are collectively owned by the working class. So it fits the definition. The bigger they get the less consequences for their actions... that is until the entire state fails.

When microsoft fails theyll leave a vaccum in the desktop os space

Man, I guess that makes sense... I was just hoping it wasn't something so lame. Maybe like "The CIA can spy better on 11" or some other reason. So its just them being ass holes.

 

[Michaelsoft_Binbows]

So can they can push more garbage. I am actually looking towards 2025 because it means a ton of free hardware for me.

What do you use?

 

[Ashman]

What do you use?

Linux

 

[punisheddead]

I enjoy schizo theories about corporate communists as much as the next guy but lets be real here.

Here's just some of the reasons why 11 is being pushed and 10 is being retired:

1. "Progress" for shareholders:
Microsoft is a public company and they need to constantly "create" and "innovate" to make the shareholders happy and make their stock grow. Who cares that 11 is just a reskinned 10? It's progress and it's a reason to keep jobs. Other corpos also do this like YouTube with unnecessary UI changes.

2. Some data is good but they want all the data + ads:
10 gives Microsoft a lot of juicy and valuable telemetry. 11 can give them even more, it's always easier to have it baked in then updating the old OS. Also ads, 10 had a push back for the baked in apps and ads, 11 will have it as well but less as people get used to it. Tech savvy users will bypass it, normies will look at ads every time they open their start menu and everyone is happy. And that's the real money maker (+ corporate sales), it's also why windows is given away for free and super easy to pirate.

3. Planned obsolescence and Microsoft throwing its weight around:
For whatever reason TPM has been decided to be mandatory so old hardware is out and new hardware is in. It could be a back alley deal for new hardware to be sold or some grift for investors but normies will buy new tech anyways, their computer is getting old anyways, right? It's also Microsoft throwing its weight around to instill investor confidence and to see what more they can get away with. Forcing from windows 7 to 8 was tough, from 8 to 10 less so, and from 10 to 11 will be even less so.

So what to do? You can take the hit with windows 11 and strip the shit out of it or use LTSC. You can fuck around with Linux. Or if you're made of money you can go with MacOS. No option isn't going to result in some form of effort on your part. And do what's best for you, because the average consumer sure isn't going to.

 

[Michaelsoft_Binbows]

Linux

I think I might switch after this

 

[Noxy]

Because MS is basically rebuilding windows from scratch, why do you think Win11 removed features, does that make any sense?
It became unsustainable to build on top of legacy code so they are attempting to rebuild the whole shitpile into a new OS. 11 is just the first step.

 

[Some_porcupine]

One of the Wrongest takes on all of agora.
Megs corporations aren't bad because they are communists, they are bad because they are megacorporations under capitalism FYI

they maybe meant "cult of personality", such in communism...

Microsoft is a public company and they need to constantly "create" and "innovate" to make the shareholders happy and make their stock grow. Who cares that 11 is just a reskinned 10? It's progress and it's a reason to keep jobs. Other corpos also do this like YouTube with unnecessary UI changes.

shareholders? they live in heir own bubble in bunkers.... no one want those change expect them when they make things outta their asses

 

[Some_porcupine]

.

 

[pickleman]

One of the Wrongest takes on all of agora.
Megs corporations aren't bad because they are communists, they are bad because they are megacorporations under capitalism FYI

If you find yourself owning less and less you're in a communist system not a capitalist one.

Megacorporations couldnt exist without the state and public money. By virtue of working in the USA you probably own microsoft shares somewhere down the line via retirement funds wither you want them or not. You are forced beyond your will to invest in microsoft. By virtue of paying into insurance, by virtue of paying in any fund, you are indirectly sending money to microsoft.

This is a tax system with extra hoops and changes in symmantics.

You goto work, guess what? Theres probably windows on that machine your employer gives you. You do not have a choice to use a linux desktop at work. This essentially gives windows a public utility nature. By using windows you feed into the bot net, and all of this is forced on you. Kind of like how public transit forces a particular train car or bus onto you, you cannot choose what model of train or bus to ride on its what is given by the state er capitalist.

You are a worker, and by virtue of being a worker, you share a common "ownership" in microsoft and windows. The death of windows means common causality. The death of windows impacts you as a worker because you own its losses. Your retirement is also reliant on microsoft.

Multinational corporations are just international communist states within a state. To think otherwise is to ignore the reality of their nature. When multinationals interface with government its just communists interfacing with other communists.

The objective is to take what is yours, to remove your agency, to remove your power as an individual, and humiliate you. You have no options to stop them other than to murder them or go through effort to beat them without joining them.

 

[Some_porcupine]

If you find yourself owning less and less you're in a communist system not a capitalist one.

Megacorporations couldnt exist without the state and public money. By virtue of working in the USA you probably own microsoft shares somewhere down the line via retirement funds wither you want them or not. You are forced beyond your will to invest in microsoft. By virtue of paying into insurance, by virtue of paying in any fund, you are indirectly sending money to microsoft.

This is a tax system with extra hoops and changes in symmantics.

You goto work, guess what? Theres probably windows on that machine your employer gives you. You do not have a choice to use a linux desktop at work. This essentially gives windows a public utility nature. By using windows you feed into the bot net, and all of this is forced on you. Kind of like how public transit forces a particular train car or bus onto you, you cannot choose what model of train or bus to ride on its what is given by the state er capitalist.

You are a worker, and by virtue of being a worker, you share a common "ownership" in microsoft and windows. The death of windows means common causality. The death of windows impacts you as a worker because you own its losses. Your retirement is also reliant on microsoft.

Multinational corporations are just international communist states within a state. To think otherwise is to ignore the reality of their nature. When multinationals interface with government its just communists interfacing with other communists.

The objective is to take what is yours, to remove your agency, to remove your power as an individual, and humiliate you. You have no options to stop them other than to murder them or go through effort to beat them without joining them.

That is cyberpunk and neofeudalism, - communism aimed to be classless without hierarchy and such things never have happened under it, and to be voluntary as answer to what you say, answer to corpocracy, while communism tried to take all that back, and to the owners, the people and proletariat who worked that *money* and resources, for their own use and betterment, but not viably under global rule or hegemony, but as we now see, communities - e.g. solarpunk...

That you called that communism is just in fact what Reagan, thatcher and nixon (red scare) wanted you to believe.
-what they explained, was "regulated technocratic corporate capitalism" where we are starting to live - where all is controlled by those with more (powerful) "friends" (cyber neofeudalism)...

I don't condone any actions, just trying to explain the difference. We would had a long (mental) way to go, for Gay space luxury communism, to be true...

*XaaS + credit system + UBI + gov/corpos = cyberpunk dystopia

 

[pickleman]

That is cyberpunk and neofeudalism, - communism aimed to be classless without hierarchy and such things never have happened under it, and to be voluntary as answer to what you say, answer to corpocracy, while communism tried to take all that back, and to the owners, the people and proletariat who worked that *money* and resources, for their own use and betterment, but not viably under global rule or hegemony, but as we now see, communities - e.g. solarpunk...

That you called that communism is just in fact what Reagan, thatcher and nixon (red scare) wanted you to believe.
-what they explained, was "regulated technocratic corporate capitalism" where we are starting to live - where all is controlled by those with more (powerful) "friends" (cyber neofeudalism)...

I don't condone any actions, just trying to explain the difference. We would had a long (mental) way to go, for Gay space luxury communism, to be true...

*XaaS + credit system + UBI + gov/corpos = cyberpunk dystopia

The closer you get to the truth the larger the attempts are made to gaslight you.

its all semantics. What you are observing is the means without observing the ends.

The ends is that you own nothing. It is just you and the state which you work for and provide rents (taxes) to. The only things you can "own" are disposibles which do not change power relations.

so yes you will be equal to others because you all will be poor workers working for the state apperatus. (communists)

 

[Some_porcupine]

The closer you get to the truth the larger the attempts are made to gaslight you.

its all semantics. What you are observing is the means without observing the ends.

The ends is that you own nothing. It is just you and the state which you work for and provide rents (taxes) to. The only things you can "own" are disposibles which do not change power relations.

so yes you will be equal to others because you all will be poor workers working for the state apperatus. (communists)

In communism there is no state , class, no hierarchy
You work only for community (you voulnteer - take those takes above for neoliberal Tumblr), but there is no one above or below
But I see you can't see difference, which is saddening

It is futile to explain this to you, I did it many times. Next time, read with understanding!

 

[no_chill]

They have been doing this since Vista. You should have been getting used to it since decades.

This is the reality you want and you won't want to change.

 

[A L I X]

They have been doing this since Vista. You should have been getting used to it since decades.

This is the reality you want and you won't want to change.

This means that Windows Vista was the only last trvly good Windows OS, another victory for the Frutiger Aero gang!

View: https://youtu.be/qnuTAa8LQiA?si=ywjABLnw_9FpnQ3l

 

[Some_porcupine]

This means that Windows Vista was the only last trvly good Windows OS, another victory for the Frutiger Aero gang!

View: https://youtu.be/qnuTAa8LQiA?si=ywjABLnw_9FpnQ3l

and win7 maybe