Anyone updated to Windows11 yet ?

This particular grandad uses the PC for comms, browsing, CAD/CAM, simulations of various sorts from clock pendulums to quite complex RF filters. Laptop with extension screen essential, one day I'll be back to monthly commuting (I hope) and need to take it all with me. Also have tablet for reading, phone for keeping in touch via email and WhatsApp, and more recently using OS maps for walking and cycling. The only "desktop" I have lives on a shelf under a bench in the workshop, an old Dell XP machine running Mach3.

Loads of stuff I can do now that I couldn't 5 years ago. As Dave says, no such thing as a "normal" person.

Think of all the new things I might not have permission to do. Windows is like having a dominatrix without the spanking. Lurvely

I cannot for the life of me see why an owner of a computer should allow an organisation, an American organisation at that, to control what I may, or may not, do with my computer. To me it is like buying a car, and then being told by the manufacturer that you must use this brand of petrol, and no other. Anyone trying that on with me would be told in no uncertain terms to "xxxx xxx".

I use Linux Mint, and whilst there is a problem in that the latest version doesn't allow me to easily run a DOS based database system, I can, at the moment work around it. But, as far as I know, the suppliers of Mint do not know that I use Mint. There may, of course, be a "backdoor system" that I know nothing about, but at least I haven't got Microsoft demanding that I set up an account with them.

Ditch Microsoft: Go Linux.

Peter G. Shaw

Just came across this info re Win 11 installed size and alternatives, page link below to Helpdeskgeek for those interested.

**LINK**

Emgee

Maybe a few too many generalisations in this thread. Personally I’ve tried but never owned a laptop as I don’t find them at all convenient to use. I still have a desktop machine that gets occasional use but since buying my first iPad in March 2012 the majority of my computer use is done on one. Being much cheaper than a desktop means I can upgrade more often. Also being compatible with my phone and desktop is a big plus for data syncing.

This over 55 (actually over 70) has some six machines - all in operation and meeting different use cases. Three tablets (all Win 10) two "desktops" and a fairly old laptop - hauled out on the occasions when I need to do a presentation somewhere. The oldest ( laptop) is probably 12 years old but has been upgraded with an SSD, the youngest is four years old. All run Windows 10 without problems.

None of the machines ( two of them Microsoft Surface tablets) meet the specification for Windows 11 so when Win 10 reaches end of life I will have to think.

My issue is that the reasons they will not run Windows 11 is not down to a technical issue, but because of policy decisions taken by Microsoft. Older processors work fine, but the installer checks and refuses to proceed, Neither do they have TPM 2.0 modules again a policy call by Microsoft. Is it to "ensure my online safety" or is it simply a mechanism to force me to buy new machines and simplify Microsoft's support issues.

Obsoleting perfectly useable machines seems to me to be going against the "greening trend. Wouldn't surprise me to see a volte-face by Microsoft (possibly when Windows 11 fails to gain the penetration) and either extend Win 10's end of life or more likely remove the arbitrary constraints on Windows 11.

But Apple and Android both expect you to download software from their online stores or, in the case of Apple to register the software if bought retail.

So why all the fuss when Microsoft wish to do the same?

A software licence is just that - a licence to use it according to their terms and not an outright purchase and has basically been so from the beginning.

Linux is very definitely not free for you to do what you want with - the freedom is explicitly defined in the licence and at any time any software author could remove their creation from the public domain, or start to charge for updates. I doubt many would, but the option is always there.

Not so. The GNU General Public Licence is typical. Amongst many other provisions designed to stop lockdowns, the licence says the writer must make the source code available and allow 'copy left' development of it. Thereafter, anyone is free to replicate or adapt the original source code provided they also distribute it under the same terms. Developers are allowed to profit from it, but not to restrict or prevent anyone else from developing the original code or it's successors.

Stopping proprietary ownership of software has many benefits. It allowed the Android developers to adapt and race-tune the Linux kernel to run on mobile devices without getting entangled in legal and financial complications with a business partner. In return, Android source code is freely available on the web.

Dave

Nick,

The option may be there, but I do feel that any software author who decided to charge for their (Linux based) software would end up cutting their own throat, so to speak. One of the attractions of Linux is the number of different versions, and should the authors of my favourite distro, Linux Mint, try it on, then I for one would immediately go elsewhere. Indeed, although I don't know what the current situation is, there has been an attempt by Canonical, whose software Mint is based on, to force users to use a locked down software system. However, Clement LeFevre, the, I suppose you could say, controlling author of Mint, has said that Mint is absolutely NOT going down that road. I'm sorry, I don't know the correct terms for what I am saying, you may know better, but it is sufficient for me that LeFevre has said no. What will untimately happen I know not, but as I use the Mate version of Mint, perhaps I may have to go over to Debian.

Removing the software from the public domain is indeed a problem. I mention in my first post that I was using a DOS based database. In order to run this programme under Linux Mint v. 19.x, I am currently using DOSEmu, an emulator which has not been updated since 2013 (I think). Effectively it is Abandonware, yet it is still downloadable and works satisfactorily on all versions of Mint from v.13 to v19. Unfortunately, it is not downloadable in a ready-to-run format for Mint 20+, although I am given to understand that it may work if specifically compiled by the v. 20 user. That, I'm sorry to say, is currently above my paygrade!

Peter G. Shaw

Just a few more general comments.

I haven't got a so-called smart phone, tablet, ipad, or anything of that ilk. I don't want one either. Furthermore, when I leave my house, I wish to be incommunicado. I certainly have no wish to walk the streets with a "thing" clamped to my ear. I do have a small mobile 'phone, but in the main it is there in case I need to call for assistance. FWIW, some years ago, whilst driving I developed Menieres with the commensurate vertigo and were it not for having a mobile 'phone I would have been in extreme difficulty. (Just as a matter of interest, I eventually had two operations involving the use of gentamycin to stop the vertigo. This was successful although the downside is that that ear is now just about useless, a small price to pay to get my life back.)

I use laptops, three of them at the moment. I have had desktop boxes, large, noisy devices. But the main advantage of the laptop over the desktop is their portability. Plus, their screen size puts the so-called smartphones etc to shame.

Cheers,

Peter G. Shaw

This article on GNU General Public Licence by Richard Stallman clearly states that software can be made non-free giving the example of a non-free distribution of X-Windows (although this distribution was later re-licenced as free) and argues against this and suggests that copyleft is to be encouraged but cannot be insisted on.

Gnu.org

There are several examples where combining free software becomes part of a chargeable package. If you are asked to pay for another part of a package that is someone's own non-copyright work - for example an installer for a GNUed program where you are unable to install it from that source without buying the installer and the free part in a package. The reference above gives a lot more.

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 04/11/2021 17:15:55

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 04/11/2021 17:23:34

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 04/11/2021 17:25:39

Nick

One of the things with Linux is your offered updates however it's up to you if you wish to install said update.

H

Actually, that is not strictly true. I am the author of a cross-platform (Windows, Mac, Linux) open-source software package that is fairly popular in its niche market.

It is not available from the Apple store, yet users have no problem downloading and installing it from my website. Worst case is that they get a warning message that is from an unidentified developer.

The procedure on Windows prior to Win11 was not that different, however, I did first have to go to the trouble of submitting my software to the various manufacturers of anti-virus software for "whitelisting" prior to release.

To my mind, for MS to try and force users to only install software from the MS store is primarily a cash grab. MS does offer the option of distributing free software via the MS store, but only if I want to pay them for the privilege which is not going to happen.

So any user who would like to continue using my software after switching to Win 11 would first have to leave S Mode which prevents one from installing any software that does not come from the MS Store and also prevents one from running any browser but Microsoft Edge.

S mode is only available on Win 11 Home Edition. Leaving S Mode is a permanent change, once one has left there is no going back.

Clive

Lookingg at this thread as a non-laptop owning, non-"smart"-'phone owing user of a standard PC with WIN 7 Pro and hoping to stay that way for as long as possible....

I can't help thinking from your discussions that the more our lives become entangled with computers, the more deeply we will need understand operating-systems and their configuring, before we can actually do on them what we did relatively easily whilst blissfully ignorant of such background things, only a few "Windozes" ago.

It's almost becoming analogous to a car-dealer expecting all his customers not only to be competent motorists but also have a thermodynamics (or electrical theory!) degree before even driving off the forecourt.

'

As for Windoze Ten.... I did try it. Oh dear! Not only scrappy, gimmicky and unintuitive:

It took me only two or three minutes to use MS' offer to revert the computer to 7, but two or three hours to repair the damage 10 had wrought.

MS now keeps begging me to install 'Edge' (W10's e-post system?) but I cannot trust it. It also tries to persuade me to install Win-Zip, but I am not renting costly software of no clear use to me.

... and if you were around at the "beginning" (of home computers) you'll know just what a fuss it caused when Microsoft announced that!

Well, I doubt I will go to W11, spending a couple of thousand pounds to get a new gaming rig is not on the cards.

Professionally I worked with Linux, and the only reason my home PC is windows is that I play games and inertia.

Now games and applications are far more likely to have a Linux version or Wine/Proton will allow a Windows program to run on Linux. So I expect at the end of W10 support I will switch to Linux.

My experience with mainframe computers goes back to the early 1970s where software was leased and not even licenced. I used microcomputers from 1981 and later in that year bought my first 'home' computer which used Microsoft software.

Microsoft did not introduce the concept of licencing it was almost universal practice with Lotus, Ashton Tate and the several owners of Wordstar as examples all using a similar licence approach.

The fact that even today you buy a software licence and not the software should give it away - only the terms might differ.

In the 90s I was HOD ICT & Computing at a large college and we started to install Novell networking in a small way in two computer rooms. I was awaiting one of the key disks to install the second of the two servers and so installed them both with the single key disk I had.

A couple of weeks later no second key disk had arrived so I rang Novell and said 'I am waiting for the key disk when will it arrive? In the mean time I have had to install on two networks' Brrr Click 'Hello Software Piracy section. You know you have broken the law!!' - all in less than a couple of seconds!

Anyway after we chatted he calmed down and accepted that Novell had let the college down - but he then offered 'Would you like me to come in and give a talk to your students about software piracy?'

Knowing how many disks were passed round from person to person I politely said no!

Mint does indeed charge for business & enterprise use as do several other distros including Redhat etc. The Mint 20+ release installs at a screen resolution of 2560×1600 which is a problem on some smaller /older monitors.. The free versions are just basic with no support if your system goes tixs up and as said can be withdrawn at any time. . I use Mint "trying to evaluate it to replace Windows" on one of my PC's and feel that it is still lacking in ease of use and Apps compared to Windows. Also some of my input devices will not run out of the box as they do in Windows so could be a problem. I will persevere with it for a while and maybe try another distro.

regards