Boycott Windows 11!! (Sorry, let's boycott Microsoft instead! And Apple for that matter after appealing a case with Epic where they won all but one decision. And they still had to appeal! Corporations are greedy evil POSs!)

[ZeekAncient]

Let me tell you why. When Windows 10 released in 2015, Microsoft said it would be the last Windows OS you would ever need. Meaning that from now on Windows 10 would just be updated periodically. In fact, Windows 11 was just supposed to be this big update for Windows 10.

But here we are in 2021 and Microsoft has a brand new OS for us. Not only that but anything prior to an Intel 8th Gen CPU and an AMD Ryzen Gen 2 CPU is "not supported". Oh wait some Intel Gen 7 CPUs are supported. The ones that are in Microsoft's own Surface Pro laptops. This is a bunch of bologna to make people upgrade their adequate enough PCs. Not to mention all this nonsense about TPM chips and Secure Boot. I say foul. And I say BOYCOTT!

Who's with me? BOYCOTT Windows Two Towers!!!!

I am just playing. I will probably upgrade to Windows 11. But only when they have ironed out the kinks and Direct Storage is actually a thing.

Oh but for anyone wondering about Windows OSs, you are supposed to skip every other one essentially. Going back to XP.

See it goes:

XP - Yes
Vista - No
7 - Yes
8/8.1 - No
10 - Yes
11 - You get the point.

Down with Windows Two Towers!!! Bring on Windows 12.

(The term Windows Two Towers is a trademark of me, and in reference to the number 11 looking like two towers, and in no way reference to the World Trade Center or Lord of the Rings.)

I am obviously just joking! And the disclaimer is obviously not real either. Come on now.

[plat]

You can bypass those hardware requirements now via a registry edit, plus receive updates. It's not guaranteed for the future but if you want 11 now, you can get it now.

For me, Windows 11 is a pretty decent operating system. It needs some work in the Start Menu and File Explorer depts. Since I've been running it nicely since June, I don't feel at all like "boycotting" it. No wish whatsoever to return to 10.

It picked up pretty much where 10 left off and if you want to disable the same garbage you did in 10, it seems you can. The hardware thing left a bad taste, for real.

Wish it was possible to boycott Microsoft instead. Pls. remember that Windows is near the bottom of its priority list. As a trillion-dollar tech firm that looks at the end-user as just a unit and a tool, that's the real bad guy here, in my opinion.

[ZeekAncient]

Escrito originalmente por plat:

You can bypass those hardware requirements now via a registry edit, plus receive updates. It's not guaranteed for the future but if you want 11 now, you can get it now.

For me, Windows 11 is a pretty decent operating system. It needs some work in the Start Menu and File Explorer depts. Since I've been running it nicely since June, I don't feel at all like "boycotting" it. No wish whatsoever to return to 10.

It picked up pretty much where 10 left off and if you want to disable the same garbage you did in 10, it seems you can. The hardware thing left a bad taste, for real.

Wish it was possible to boycott Microsoft instead. Pls. remember that Windows is near the bottom of its priority list. As a trillion-dollar tech firm that looks at the end-user as just a unit and a tool, that's the real bad guy here, in my opinion.

Amen! Boycott Microsoft!

[emoticorpse]

Escrito originalmente por ZeekAncient:

Escrito originalmente por calculatortamer:

idk for vista but 10 is 8.1 but with a start menu

11 is even worse since they now require you to create a microsoft account when it was optional (but hard to find) in 10
they also make it harder to switch from edge

and the minimum specs of a AAA game, constant notifications, forced updates, insane idle ram usage

Are you serious? I thought you could still delete the Microsoft account and use a local account?

And making it harder to switch from edge? Figures. I bet removing all the privacy settings is hard to do now as well.

I mean, I know everyone craps on 10 but I liked it when it first came out. Maybe it was because I was still using 7 and hated Windows 8 and 8.1. I thought 10 was like the best features of 7 and 8 combined. But IDK, maybe that is just me.

I am having serious qualms about upgrading to 11 though. My PC obviously meets the requirements, and Direct Storage sounds like it will be awesome and when it is actually available, but I had liked the idea when Microsoft had said 10 would be the last Windows you would ever need. I thought it was a cool idea to just keep upgrading it and never have to install another Windows again.

I think that their "For security reasons" explanation is bologna. They obviously are greedy and want to make more money. I guess constantly updating or upgrading Windows 10 wasn't going to net them enough money.

You don't need a Microsoft account to use Windows 11. The "making it harder to switch browsers" is true though.

[Illusion of Progress]

Escrito originalmente por calculatortamer:

idk for vista but 10 is 8.1 but with a start menu (and windows 8.1 is 7 with metro theme and more spyware)

Every version is sort of the prior one with the changes made between them, because as far as I know, Microsoft doesn't start from scratch every time and just builds upon what they have in the current version. You can see this with very early inside versions of Windows Vista, which look like a halfway mix of Windows XP and the final release version of Windows Vista. Obviously, sometimes a lot is changed, added, or removed, and that may mean parts are re-written, and after enough time it becomes something fundamentally different. But in a way Windows is an evolving thing rather than a completely new thing every time.

As for Windows Vista, it was pretty disliked at the time, and many people stuck to Windows XP over it (myself included) but then moved to, and loved, Windows 7 afterwards (myself included) even though it was sort of the same (but not the same) if that makes sense. It had high hardware requirements for the time, but it was par for the course for all Windows until then to need something newer to work well so I'm sort of not entirely sure why it specifically got flak for this (maybe because it needed a decent GPU for the Aero acceleration/glass effects?).

And Windows 7 and Windows 8 were a radically different so despite what I said about Windows building upon what came before it, this seems confusing to liken these two when this was one of the most striking changes that occurred for Windows. Windows 8 came off as an attempt to turn the desktop into a touch phone (this is when phones were really gaining prominence as web capable devices) and jumping into the walled off garden approach Apple had going on.

[emoticorpse]

Escrito originalmente por Illusion of Progress:

Escrito originalmente por calculatortamer:

idk for vista but 10 is 8.1 but with a start menu (and windows 8.1 is 7 with metro theme and more spyware)

Every version is sort of the prior one with the changes made between them, because as far as I know, Microsoft doesn't start from scratch every time and just builds upon what they have in the current version. You can see this with very early inside versions of Windows Vista, which look like a halfway mix of Windows XP and the final release version of Windows Vista. Obviously, sometimes a lot is changed, added, or removed, and that may mean parts are re-written, and after enough time it becomes something fundamentally different. But in a way Windows is an evolving thing rather than a completely new thing every time.

As for Windows Vista, it was pretty disliked at the time, and many people stuck to Windows XP over it (myself included) but then moved to, and loved, Windows 7 afterwards (myself included) even though it was sort of the same (but not the same) if that makes sense. It had high hardware requirements for the time, but it was par for the course for all Windows until then to need something newer to work well so I'm sort of not entirely sure why it specifically got flak for this (maybe because it needed a decent GPU for the Aero acceleration/glass effects?).

And Windows 7 and Windows 8 were a radically different so despite what I said about Windows building upon what came before it, this seems confusing to liken these two when this was one of the most striking changes that occurred for Windows. Windows 8 came off as an attempt to turn the desktop into a touch phone (this is when phones were really gaining prominence as web capable devices) and jumping into the walled off garden approach Apple had going on.

Microsoft should just use the loophole and call each version a "distro" so people stop complaining.

[AD]

Escrito originalmente por ZeekAncient:

Escrito originalmente por AD:

The support is improving, yes. Especially proton has made a big difference in my experience, but while it's amazing and it's improving, it's also not something magical that makes everything just work So if you want to try then google or check on protondb if your games work.

I was just reading up on protondb actually. Not sure which Linux I should try. I mean I got my certification through school working on Kali Linux and Ubuntu but I don't think that would be the best options for a gaming rig. But would something like Linux Mint be too limiting. And also no matter which Linux Distro I use, I take it I will need to use proton to get most of the games to work correct?

I have heard Pop!_OS is good when it comes to gaming, in part because you can download a version that has better NVIDIA support (think it comes with the drivers out of the box or something). Personally I use Xubuntu (it's relatively lightweight and lets me do things my way), but I don't have an NVIDIA card so for me that part doesn't matter. NVIDIA has been problematic for Linux, so if you have an NVIDIA card you should check on how to get proper drivers as soon as possible on whatever distro you choose.

You will need to use proton, yes, but proton is built into the Linux version of steam. You pretty much only need to tell Steam to use proton for a game and it will handle the rest. I think you can also set an option so it runs all Windows games through proton automatically.

EDIT:

Ubuntu should be fine, it's as capable as any other distro. It's just that if you have NVIDIA you might want to save yourself quite a bit of headache by going with something that has good NVIDIA support out of the box (like I've heard that Pop!_OS has).

Kali Linux isn't made to play games on or even be a daily driver, though. If I understand things correctly, it's a niche OS for a specific purpose and not something you would do ordinary computer things on. So I wouldn't advice Kali Linux.

[ZeekAncient]

Escrito originalmente por AD:

Escrito originalmente por ZeekAncient:

I was just reading up on protondb actually. Not sure which Linux I should try. I mean I got my certification through school working on Kali Linux and Ubuntu but I don't think that would be the best options for a gaming rig. But would something like Linux Mint be too limiting. And also no matter which Linux Distro I use, I take it I will need to use proton to get most of the games to work correct?

I have heard Pop!_OS is good when it comes to gaming, in part because you can download a version that has better NVIDIA support (think it comes with the drivers out of the box or something). Personally I use Xubuntu (it's relatively lightweight and lets me do things my way), but I don't have an NVIDIA card so for me that part doesn't matter. NVIDIA has been problematic for Linux, so if you have an NVIDIA card you should check on how to get proper drivers as soon as possible on whatever distro you choose.

You will need to use proton, yes, but proton is built into the Linux version of steam. You pretty much only need to tell Steam to use proton for a game and it will handle the rest. I think you can also set an option so it runs all Windows games through proton automatically.

EDIT:

Ubuntu should be fine, it's as capable as any other distro. It's just that if you have NVIDIA you might want to save yourself quite a bit of headache by going with something that has good NVIDIA support out of the box (like I've heard that Pop!_OS has).

Kali Linux isn't made to play games on or even be a daily driver, though. If I understand things correctly, it's a niche OS for a specific purpose and not something you would do ordinary computer things on. So I wouldn't advice Kali Linux.

I do have an RTX 3070 Ti, so I will probably look into Pop!. Thank you.

And Kali Linux is a niche OS. But it is very powerful, and open. Essentially it is a hacker's paradise. Thus why we used it for cyber security.

[SenMithrarin85]

Escrito originalmente por emoticorpse:

Escrito originalmente por ZeekAncient:

Are you serious? I thought you could still delete the Microsoft account and use a local account?

And making it harder to switch from edge? Figures. I bet removing all the privacy settings is hard to do now as well.

I mean, I know everyone craps on 10 but I liked it when it first came out. Maybe it was because I was still using 7 and hated Windows 8 and 8.1. I thought 10 was like the best features of 7 and 8 combined. But IDK, maybe that is just me.

I am having serious qualms about upgrading to 11 though. My PC obviously meets the requirements, and Direct Storage sounds like it will be awesome and when it is actually available, but I had liked the idea when Microsoft had said 10 would be the last Windows you would ever need. I thought it was a cool idea to just keep upgrading it and never have to install another Windows again.

I think that their "For security reasons" explanation is bologna. They obviously are greedy and want to make more money. I guess constantly updating or upgrading Windows 10 wasn't going to net them enough money.

You don't need a Microsoft account to use Windows 11. The "making it harder to switch browsers" is true though.

you do for the home edition apparently. online setup during OOBE too I believe. I've only tested Pro, so I can't confirm.

[SenMithrarin85]

Escrito originalmente por ZeekAncient:

Escrito originalmente por AD:

I have heard Pop!_OS is good when it comes to gaming, in part because you can download a version that has better NVIDIA support (think it comes with the drivers out of the box or something). Personally I use Xubuntu (it's relatively lightweight and lets me do things my way), but I don't have an NVIDIA card so for me that part doesn't matter. NVIDIA has been problematic for Linux, so if you have an NVIDIA card you should check on how to get proper drivers as soon as possible on whatever distro you choose.

You will need to use proton, yes, but proton is built into the Linux version of steam. You pretty much only need to tell Steam to use proton for a game and it will handle the rest. I think you can also set an option so it runs all Windows games through proton automatically.

EDIT:

Ubuntu should be fine, it's as capable as any other distro. It's just that if you have NVIDIA you might want to save yourself quite a bit of headache by going with something that has good NVIDIA support out of the box (like I've heard that Pop!_OS has).

Kali Linux isn't made to play games on or even be a daily driver, though. If I understand things correctly, it's a niche OS for a specific purpose and not something you would do ordinary computer things on. So I wouldn't advice Kali Linux.

I do have an RTX 3070 Ti, so I will probably look into Pop!. Thank you.

And Kali Linux is a niche OS. But it is very powerful, and open. Essentially it is a hacker's paradise. Thus why we used it for cyber security.

i've tested a few linux distros. POP OS does have the nvidia driver enabled by default, but others just require the driver to be downloaded from the "additional drivers menu". Simply choose the latest propriety.

[Haruspex]

Even if you could drum up enough enthusiasm for a boycott among enthusiasts, enthusiasts are in the minority.

Know why boycotts don't seem to work? Because the ones who care enough to actually boycott some game or company are such a tiny portion of the market, the company barely feels it, if they even feel it at all.

Enthusiasts may be loud, but compared to other users we're tiny.\

By all means, vote with your wallet. Just remember that you vote is just one out of potentially hundreds of millions, and most people just don't care.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

Boycotting works. I have seen plenty of games on Steam and other places that suffered from poor sales because of community rage and Review bombing. Example: Shadow of War and Battlefront 2 for their Loot-boxes. Then both companies had to kneel down and remove Loot-boxes from these games. Those 2 were lucky, some games never managed to stand up again.

[Haruspex]

Escrito originalmente por 🌈Cloud Boy🌈:

Boycotting works. I have seen plenty of games on Steam and other places that suffered from poor sales because of community rage and Review bombing. Example: Shadow of War and Battlefront 2 for their Loot-boxes. Then both companies had to kneel down and remove Loot-boxes from these games. Those 2 were lucky, some games never managed to stand up again.

But did they suffer because of calls for a boycott, or because they were terrible games with over-aggressive monetization and "surprise mechanics"?

If you take any armchair activism out of the equation, if a game (or new version of Windows) is good, people will buy it and enjoy it. (There's also marketing. Doesn't matter how good a game is. Nobody will buy it if they haven't heard of it, but lets assume equal marketing push for the sake of argument.)

If a game is bad, people will spend their money elsewhere.

Loot boxes require careful balance. Too aggressive and the whole game suffers. Not aggressive enough and there's no reason for people to spend money on them. Battlefront 2 and Shadow of War were too aggressive.

In spite of gamers everywhere crying out to avoid games with lootboxes, They're still a massive source of income for mobile games and publishers like EA. So much so that the profit eclipses the typical make game - sell game business model.

However pissing off the Internet does cost, even if it doesn't make that big a dent to the bottom line. Valve learned this when they worked with Bethesda to monetize modding. It's enough of a cost that companies probably want to avoid it.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

Escrito originalmente por 8bitbeard:

Escrito originalmente por 🌈Cloud Boy🌈:

Boycotting works. I have seen plenty of games on Steam and other places that suffered from poor sales because of community rage and Review bombing. Example: Shadow of War and Battlefront 2 for their Loot-boxes. Then both companies had to kneel down and remove Loot-boxes from these games. Those 2 were lucky, some games never managed to stand up again.

But did they suffer because of calls for a boycott, or because they were terrible games with over-aggressive monetization and "surprise mechanics"?

If you take any armchair activism out of the equation, if a game (or new version of Windows) is good, people will buy it and enjoy it. (There's also marketing. Doesn't matter how good a game is. Nobody will buy it if they haven't heard of it, but lets assume equal marketing push for the sake of argument.)

If a game is bad, people will spend their money elsewhere.

Loot boxes require careful balance. Too aggressive and the whole game suffers. Not aggressive enough and there's no reason for people to spend money on them. Battlefront 2 and Shadow of War were too aggressive.

In spite of gamers everywhere crying out to avoid games with lootboxes, They're still a massive source of income for mobile games and publishers like EA. So much so that the profit eclipses the typical make game - sell game business model.

Boycotting works only if there is a valid reason, obviously.
Without any valid reason, mass population won't support the boycotting.

[A&A]

Boycotting?
Everybody is moving to linux and microsoft is editing their requirements

[logith]

Escrito originalmente por ZeekAncient:

Escrito originalmente por calculatortamer:

10 is a ♥♥♥♥ no from me

10 was a no? As compared to Vista or 8/8.1? I don't know. Compared to those it was amazing. You do know you can disable or rather enable a bunch of privacy settings and disable a bunch of ad settings so Microsoft can't spy on you? I hope 11 hasn't gotten rid of those features. I don't like Microsoft gathering info from my system or spying on me.

As with any proprietary operating system you can't ever truly know what they collect on you, even with programs to edit the registry updates can revert those changes without you knowing

So is it worth it fighting your own computer which you can't know you truly won against, or use an operating system that out of the box won't do this