Fuck^H^H^H^HThank you M$

"Hundreds of millions of business PCs are still on Windows 10 as D-Day near"

This is 100% the fault of Microsoft for breaking their promise that Windows 10 would be the last ever version of Windows. In addition to Microsoft's own scheme, anti- virus and malware companies will still be offering support to Windows 10 users for a few years yet. It is also possible to convert some theoretically unsuitable computers to Windows 11, eg with the help of computer specialists. It would also be possible to convert one of the Linux varieties or Chrome OS Flex.

From an environmental perspective, I think what Microsoft is doing is deeply irresponsible.

In addition to Microsoft's own scheme, anti- virus and malware companies will still be offering support to Windows 10 users for a few years yet.

And tell us exactly how antivirus and malware companies will fix Kernel Level security vulnerabilities in Windows 10?

Not even the fine folks of https://0patch.com can do so...

I think what Microsoft is doing is deeply irresponsible.

This is where regulators should act, but they won't. Why? Most governments are dependent on Microsoft services.

This is where regulators should act, but they won't. Why? Most governments are dependent on Microsoft services.

I work for a regulator in this very field, and therefore can give you the correct answer. When legislation on WEEE was written, all the obligations were upon hardware producers or distributors to ensure routes were available for responsible disposal when kit reached end of life. Nobody at that time considered that a major software supplier might intentionally act in a way to cause millions of PCs to become earlier candidates for electronic waste. There are rules on right to repair that cover spare parts availability for some appliances, they don't apply to most tech gear, and are written around the idea of hardware availability. Even if government now used secondary legislation* to amend either WEEE regulations or Ecodesign regs, it would be quite exceptional (and therefore unlikely) that the rules could be retrospective. The cyber security bill going through parliament might have new provisions (or less helpfully, new interpretations by the courts) but again, won't be retrospective.

* Secondary legislation is the fastest way government can pass new laws, but can only be done if a secretary of state has been granted those powers for a specific piece of primary legislation. Look it up if you want to know more.

This is where regulators should act, but they won't. Why? Most governments are dependent on Microsoft services stuffed brown envelopes .

There. FTFY.

"This is 100% the fault of Microsoft for breaking their promise that Windows 10 would be the last ever version of Windows."

They didn't 'promise' this - some middle-ranking member of staff made a passing comment in a presentation that it would be the last version of Windows. That was it - nothing in writing, nothing ever confirmed by senior staff. Clearly the person who said it has been proved wrong.

I don't agree with what Microsoft is doing - they could easily have made W11 so that it would work on older hardware too - but this constant "they promised" gets wearing. No they didn't.

Just like His Billness (allegedly) said 640k is enough for everyone. Such is the corporate/billionaire class.

Compare these to the promises made by His Muskiness and you will see that they are not even in the same class.

And D-Day itself is actually mid-November when the next updates would normally have appeared. And they still will for millions in the EU thanks to consumer protection law, which we're going to come to appreciate again and again over the next few years as Microsoft tries to use Windows 11 to force its services on an unsuspecting world.

It's difficult not to see the whole episode as intimidation with many users understandably worried enough to put pressure on management for new machines. But this has been compounded with Microsoft regularly moving the goalposts over what counts as "Windows 11" compatible so that many machines that could have been bought with Windows 11 installed, are now no longer considered suitable.

Now machines bought in 2020 or 2021 can be considered EOL by many businesses – the costs will have already written off – but the costs associated with new hardware outside of any planned replacement can be considerable*. This is presumably the taste of things to come with Microsoft keen for us to be running its AI software on our machines – why should we bother ourselves with the burden of choice – and the ability to inform users when their hardware is no longer up to snuff.

The best idea, for those who are elligible, would be to sign up for the extra year of support and sit the current wave out as there will be bargains to be had next year.

* And I don't consider PCs to be any different to other company equipment, though company cars are probaby a far bigger waste of resources. If we're supposed to use it for longer, don't make it tax-deductible.

Can we expect that one of the updates delivered to windows 10 machines next week shall display full screen warnings at login time again, or will it be a polite taskbar notification?

I got a fullscreen warning in the middle of working on a document.

I thought that was a virus, then realised it's just Microsoft.

Hardly any difference nowadays!

Shouldn't that be...

I thought that was a virus, then realised it's just those scumbags at Microsoft. They can FSCK off.

What I don't understand is the different treatment of home and business users.

A home user who has logged into a Microsoft Account gets free "Extended Security Updates". But a business user who is paying a higher fee for their office software does not get this free support. Why?

This is a little funny as I know some small businesses who cheat the system and use Home Editions of office software. They now get the free ESU, but businesses doing things by the book and paying the higher fees don't get this option.

Because no good deed ever goes unpunished in their world?

I would assume that they are reckoning on most businesses having policies which require them to run supported versions of the software, so they see an opportunity to charge them for extended updates here. Home users are far less likely to pay extra even once it's out of support.

"... after which business customers will be forced to pay for extended security updates at $61 for the following 12 months. This doubles to $122 for year two and doubles again for year three."

Let me get this straight. Microsoft sells you a defective product then, after a while, charges you ever increasing fees to fix said product in order to induce you to buy another almost certainly defective product which will almost certainly eventually cost you more money to fix defects unless you buy yet another almost certainly defective product in a few years?

Great business plan there. Designed by the Mafia, the Medellin Cartel, or Donald Trump?

(And, parenthetically, there doesn't seem to be much incentive there for Microsoft to put much effort into shipping defect free products.)

«Let me get this straight. Microsoft sells you a defective product»

Yes, and incomplete to boot, Microsoft tells us so clearly, as they clearly state that the product will get "new features and general bug fixes (including security ones) for at least five years after release, and at leas 5 years of security fixes only after that". So that we can make an informed choice about getting it, or not. And if one buys the product 6 years after release, one still knows the support dates reffer to launch, not date of purchase, so one can make, again, an informed decition.,

«charges you ever increasing fees to fix said product» Those extra fees only kick in AFTER 10 years of varying levels of FREE support have been exhausted. And, for the fist time this year, normal consumers can get them too, along with enperprises.

«in order to induce you to buy another almost certainly defective product» If your machine Qualifies, the new defective product is free as in beer. The new defective product launched in Oct 2021. In august 2017, you could already buy machines that would comply with the HW requirements, and could upgrade to the new defective product for free as in beer.

And the thing is, this is standard practice in the Wider industry, and pre-dates Windows:

SunOS, Oracle, AiX, RedHat, SAP. Same scheme. ~ about a decade (give or take) from launch of free updates and security fixes + Expensive Paid security for many more moons.

Great business plan there. Designed by the Mafia, the Medellin Cartel, or Donald Trump?

That being an inclusive 'or'...

Sorry Redmond, you yourself defined that a vast majority of them didn't have the hardware to do so.

Fuck you.

"On October 14, Microsoft will issue the final updates and security fixes"

No thank you.

Windows 11 is so FUCKING slow, FUCKING annoying and the usability is so FUCKING bad.

The few improvements below that FUCKED UP UI are overcompensated big big time by the FUCKING inefficiency the FUCKING UI pushes upon us.

And MS does not give a fuck about improving the speed.

Microsoft ARE producing updates for Windows 10.

Firstly, for those who pay. Secondly, for EU users — because the EU complained.

Admittedly, it’s not really "free", because you still need a Microsoft account, and that comes with all the tracking that Microsoft builds in.

But here’s the thing: if they’re already producing updates, they’re already spending the time and money to do so. It wouldn’t cost them any more to just let every Windows 10 PC in the world get the updates. Except it would — not in production costs, but in lost sales. Those older computers wouldn’t be replaced by shiny new ones that:

1. insist on Microsoft accounts, and

2. come with shiny new Windows licences.

And their hardware partners wouldn’t get all the extra sales either. The fact that Microsoft are forcing most of the world to either stick with Windows 10 or upgrade means three things:

1. If people don’t upgrade and stick with Windows 10, then what happened to their “security above all else” pledge they were mumbling about the other day?

2. If people do upgrade, then millions of perfectly good computers go into landfill.

3. If people upgrade, Microsoft and their manufacturing partners make more money.

So what does that mean? It means Microsoft have deliberately implemented a policy that makes them more money, screws over PC owners, and creates more landfill in the process.

It is so fucking irresponsible and disingenuous! They are literally fucking up the environment so they can make more money. Don’t they have enough? Does corporate responsibility even exist anymore?

Dear slaves suckers beloved customers,

Welcome to your past, your present, and your future.

Thank you for flying with us.

Yours faithfully,

Microsoft.

Is it just my customers (in Norfolk, UK) that are choosing to COMPLETELY ignore this for the most part? So many have said they're just going to wing it and replace as the hardware wears out.

I'm no fan of MS, and I know 11 only needs new hardware cos they say so, but even capable PCs aren't being upgraded.

Genuinely curious...

If any of them have cyber insurance, they may want to check their terms. If they don't, they may want to get some and upgrade their PCs.

I've taken the view that no more updates is what I'm after. Honestly, about the only thing I *might* need an update for is a network facing unauthenticated 0day in the kernel. But I do have a firewall, so not that scared about it either. And for the rest, patched or not, your just as vulnerable since nearly all attacks involve HUMAN BEINGS sitting at the keyboard clicking on things. Can't patch that.

I for one welcome the new more stable windows 10 without 'updates' to break shit constantly.

Let me move the taskbar to where I want to put it (on the side) and then I'll think about moving to windows 11

It's a bit like...

Here's ENCOM OS 12, our best ever most secure operating system ever

What is different on it?

We put a 12 on the box.

My shop decided to outsource a few months back, the inhouse had done all the W11 builds and testing, ready to roll and down came the axe. Now having to pay the outsourcer a nice chunk of change to do a completely new W11 build/test project. Also intereresting how there's been request to spend flipping great wadges of additional cash on new shiny laptops, all convenienntly purchased through the outsourcer too.

This W11 malarky is making some services companies a very nice tidy profit!

Just finished moving a second friend's PC from Windows 10 to Linux Mint. The third one is waiting in the wings.