pcworld Microsoft backs down: Older PCs will be able to run Windows 11, unofficially

[ENTERPRISE]

Quote

Microsoft said Friday that the company is relenting somewhat on its minimum requirements for Windows 11, allowing enthusiasts that understand the risks to download and upgrade Windows 11 on older, unsupported hardware. Exact details remain murky, however, due to conflicting reports and the lack of an official Microsoft statement.

 

Users who choose to download a standalone Windows 11 ISO file (as explained in how to upgrade to the Windows 11 beta) will be permitted to run Windows 11, even if the PC doesn’t technically qualify for the OS upgrade. Reports by ZDNet, The Verge, Windows Central, and Thurrott.com all included unsourced attributions from Microsoft spokespeople that say users will be able to run Windows 11 on unsupported hardware. Some of the publications implied that there will be a set of minimum hardware requirements that Microsoft will enforce, while others simply ignored them.

Source. 

 

This whole "will it, won't it" is getting silly now with Windows 11. The ultimate fact is the OS can run on a huge hardware set but Microsoft are just putting up artificial barriers.  Instead of leaving it's compatibility like Windows 10 they have really muddied the waters aiding confusion. 

 

What I don't understand is you can install Windows 11 via ISO on older hardware....but Microsoft punishes you with no Windows Updates ? I mean that serves literally nobody.  Microsoft giving with one hand only to take with the other. 

 

Windows 11 is nice (IMO) but the way Microsoft has gone about it's release is a farce. I understand the TPM requirements BUT I still don't think it needs enforcement. That should be up to the user/admin deploying it.

 

[Andrew]

I actually agree. There's a ton of more than good enough hardware that can run Windows 11 but they wanted to bring in the TPM 2.0 requirement. I can understand requiring a 64 bit CPU, that's been the standard for a very long time now. But requiring an Intel 8xxx or Ryzen 2000 or newer makes no sense. Especially when something like an Intel Atom x6200FE will work with no issues, but a 7700K won't. They should just give older CPUs full support, but have a warning message when you try to install it saying "This PC does not have TPM 2.0, you will not get the best security unless you buy a TPM 2.0 compatible PC" or something like that.

[ENTERPRISE]

1 hour ago, Andrew said:

I actually agree. There's a ton of more than good enough hardware that can run Windows 11 but they wanted to bring in the TPM 2.0 requirement. I can understand requiring a 64 bit CPU, that's been the standard for a very long time now. But requiring an Intel 8xxx or Ryzen 2000 or newer makes no sense. Especially when something like an Intel Atom x6200FE will work with no issues, but a 7700K won't. They should just give older CPUs full support, but have a warning message when you try to install it saying "This PC does not have TPM 2.0, you will not get the best security unless you buy a TPM 2.0 compatible PC" or something like that.

Yeah they need to make the TPM 2.0 optional, but just advise it is for best security if you have it. 

 

I agree, there CPU compatibility list makes no sense, the have made much lesser CPU's (performance wise) fully compatible with Win11, yet other CPU's of similar and far better performance are not compatible. I honestly wonder who came up with that list as they need re-educating. 

[UltraMega]

I guess I'm the odd man out, but I actually agree with Microsoft's choice to put raise the floor on hardware security. After all the spectre stuff and other security issues over the last 5 years or so, I think it makes sense. I am far from a security expert but in my laymen's understanding, I think the world is still kinda recovering from the stuxnet leak and added hardware security might be part of that. 

That said though, I get that it's a little awkward for a software company to impose new hardware limits, but it happens. I bet if Microsoft made a requirement that windows 11 will only install to an SSD and not an HDD (could still have secondary HDDs), not many tekkies would complain, a lot might praise the idea haha. The fact that windows 11 doesn't have any new features that matter also makes it less of an issue to me. Usually there's a new version of DirectX or something, but this time it just runs better on mobile hardware. 

[Andrew]

4 hours ago, UltraMega said:

I guess I'm the odd man out, but I actually agree with Microsoft's choice to put raise the floor on hardware security. After all the spectre stuff and other security issues over the last 5 years or so, I think it makes sense. I am far from a security expert but in my laymen's understanding, I think the world is still kinda recovering from the stuxnet leak and added hardware security might be part of that. 

That said though, I get that it's a little awkward for a software company to impose new hardware limits, but it happens. I bet if Microsoft made a requirement that windows 11 will only install to an SSD and not an HDD (could still have secondary HDDs), not many tekkies would complain, a lot might praise the idea haha. The fact that windows 11 doesn't have any new features that matter also makes it less of an issue to me. Usually there's a new version of DirectX or something, but this time it just runs better on mobile hardware. 

And SSD requirement won't be as much of a problem because you can just get a 120GB SATA SSD these days for like £20 vs having to spend a couple of hundred on a new CPU and motherboard.

[UltraMega]

3 hours ago, Andrew said:

And SSD requirement won't be as much of a problem because you can just get a 120GB SATA SSD these days for like £20 vs having to spend a couple of hundred on a new CPU and motherboard.

Sure but since windows 11 doesn't have any new features worth mentioning, I don't see that as an issue because no one who is using older hardware is going to need anything from windows 11, 10 will still work just as well. 

[steakikan]

On 31/08/2021 at 02:10, UltraMega said:

I guess I'm the odd man out, but I actually agree with Microsoft's choice to put raise the floor on hardware security. After all the spectre stuff and other security issues over the last 5 years or so, I think it makes sense. I am far from a security expert but in my laymen's understanding, I think the world is still kinda recovering from the stuxnet leak and added hardware security might be part of that. 

That said though, I get that it's a little awkward for a software company to impose new hardware limits, but it happens. I bet if Microsoft made a requirement that windows 11 will only install to an SSD and not an HDD (could still have secondary HDDs), not many tekkies would complain, a lot might praise the idea haha. The fact that windows 11 doesn't have any new features that matter also makes it less of an issue to me. Usually there's a new version of DirectX or something, but this time it just runs better on mobile hardware. 

The question is does TPM actually protect us from that?

[UltraMega]

9 hours ago, steakikan said:

The question is does TPM actually protect us from that?

I think the questions is; does TPM protect enough to be useful. 

[ENTERPRISE]

9 hours ago, steakikan said:

The question is does TPM actually protect us from that?

Good question, never looked into if TPM mitigates those kind of attacks.

[Diffident]

TPM's main function is cryptology.

 

Quote

Trusted Platform Module provides

• A hardware random number generator
• Facilities for the secure generation of cryptographic keys for limited uses.
• Remote attestation: Creates a nearly unforgeable hash key summary of the hardware and software configuration. The software in charge of hashing the configuration data determines the extent of the summary. This allows a third party to verify that the software has not been changed.
• Binding: Encrypts data using the TPM bind key, a unique RSA key descended from a storage key
• Sealing: Similar to binding, but in addition, specifies the TPM state^[7] for the data to be decrypted (unsealed).
• Other Trusted Computing functions for the data to be decrypted (unsealed).

 

This is why Microsoft wants it

 

Quote

Any application can use a TPM chip for:

• Digital rights management (DRM)
• Windows Defender
• Windows Domain logon
• Protection and enforcement of software licenses
• Prevention of cheating in online games

Another example of platform integrity via TPM is in the use of Microsoft Office 365 licensing and Outlook Exchange

 

TCG (Trusted Computing Group) has faced resistance to the deployment of this technology in some areas, where some authors see possible uses not specifically related to Trusted Computing, which may raise privacy concerns. The concerns include the abuse of remote validation of software (where the manufacturer‍—‌and not the user who owns the computer system‍—‌decides what software is allowed to run) and possible ways to follow actions taken by the user being recorded in a database, in a manner that is completely undetectable to the user

It's not for the type of "security" everyone is thinking about.

[schuck6566]

19 hours ago, Diffident said:

TPM's main function is cryptology.

 

 

This is why Microsoft wants it

 

It's not for the type of "security" everyone is thinking about.

So,if I use it with my cpu doing the TPM function, and my cpu fails, will my stuff on the drives be unavailable because it's been securely encrypted by the failed tpm and the new 1 will be generating new codes? I hate not knowing.

[Diffident]

4 hours ago, schuck6566 said:

So,if I use it with my cpu doing the TPM function, and my cpu fails, will my stuff on the drives be unavailable because it's been securely encrypted by the failed tpm and the new 1 will be generating new codes? I hate not knowing.

If you're encrypting your drive, backup your keys.