Corporate depreciation cyclesWhat measure is that exactly? The 1990s, back when Moore's Law actually applied?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Corporate depreciation cyclesWhat measure is that exactly? The 1990s, back when Moore's Law actually applied?
Pushing what boundaries? Once the secure boot and tpm requirements are tossed Win11 runs as well as 10 does on the same hardware. There are no boundaries being pushed and I sure as hell don't want to see an OS pushing hardware boundaries since it means the OS is going to be getting in the way and using resources it doesn't need taking them away from the software I'm running on top of the OS.I actually don't mind that 11 is pushing hardware requirements up. It's rare Microsoft really pushes the boundaries, so it's refreshing for once. However, I do think not 'officially' support Skylake, and Zen 1 is a bit too aggressive.
Performance per watt? Single thread performance? Multi core performance?What measure is that exactly? The 1990s, back when Moore's Law actually applied?
Corporate depreciation cycles
Performance per watt? Single thread performance? Multi core performance?
here, compare a 1700x vs a 3700x:
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2281?vs=2520
And then a 3700x vs a 5800x.
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2665?vs=2675
1700x to 5800x is, what, > 50% perf improvement?
Mmmm hmmm. The majority of users would not be able to tell the difference between Zen 1 and Zen 3. Do you know why that is? I'll give you a hint. It's the same reason most people can't tell the difference between the speed of light and the speed of electricity.
I do not agree but, that is ok, the difference between Zen1 and Zen3 is significant, very much so in gaming, at any resolution. Even Zen2 is noticeably better than Zen1 and Zen+.
Edit: In fact, this is the first time in a couple in at least 15 years that it is worth upgrading from one year to the next.
Maybe they'd like to pay for a Windows 11 upgrade so that they'd be able to run an Android app that they use for work. Why stop them?
Android apps can possibly cripple the performance because they run inside a virtual OS (that has to be secure with many restrictions)
Microsoft probably still testing what is possible/feasible.
Average performance hit on unsupported hardware is 30-40% & at the worst case it can bring the CPU to a standstill
Slower than the cell phone they're running it on?
Frank Lesniak (@FrankLesniak) Tweeted:
https://twitter.com/FrankLesniak/status/1409737203975135233?s=20
Old article from 3 years ago (worst case performance on unsupported CPUs can be a 200x hit)
Brent Arkley (@Borecxx) Tweeted:
https://twitter.com/Borecxx/status/1026099855914135554?s=20
What I did find was a line in the Windows Internals 7th Edition book by Mark Russinovich and Alex Ionescu. It states:
So here is our first evidence of a potential performance point. If MBEC is not available then it uses Software Emulation in the form of RUM.
The next insight came from Rafal Wojtczuks VBS Security Analysis from 2016
The full document is here:
https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-16...ndows-10-Virtualization-Based-Security-wp.pdf
or youtube video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_646Gmr_uo0
So the justification now is that there is a some possible, theoretical edge-case in which a single Windows 11 feature runs beautifully on coffee lake, but is utter shit on kaby lake? Except that the problem is really in skylake, not kaby lake, but let's block kaby lake anyway? I dunno, sounds flimsy.
You summarized it pretty well.
Hope Microsoft is able to qualify kaby lake CPUs too
ye, they have said as much. they are going to access the requirements and make adjustments. i wouldnt be surprised if they relax the tpm stuff on custom systems and force oems to be w11 "certified".Microsoft probably still testing what is possible/feasible.
In all honesty, Nehalem systems, even over clocked, feel pretty slow in win 10 compared to something like a 5800x, even if it’s just for a “kids box”. If you take that hardware and move it to Linux, you might as well buy a raspberry pi and drop your power footprint to sub 5w.Maybe they can qualify Nehalem if they throw something in the EULA to the effect of "don't get mad at us because you can't run android apps, or you got hacked by Fancy Bear because you didn't have TPM and your password was "password"
You don’t, but they also don’t care about you. You’re not a revenue source.But I'm not a corporation, why should I care?
You don’t, but they also don’t care about you. You’re not a revenue source.
Yep.Mmmm hmmm. The majority of users would not be able to tell the difference between Zen 1 and Zen 3. Do you know why that is? I'll give you a hint. It's the same reason most people can't tell the difference between the speed of light and the speed of electricity.
Yep.I do not agree but, that is ok, the difference between Zen1 and Zen3 is significant, very much so in gaming, at any resolution. Even Zen2 is noticeably better than Zen1 and Zen+.
Edit: In fact, this is the first time in a couple in at least 15 years that it is worth upgrading from one year to the next.
Because they’re not paying for an upgrade. You don’t pay for upgrades. Not since windows 7. Not a revenue source. It’s all about the Benjamin’s. In this case, things 5+ years old are not really generating cash, but do generate support problems. That’s a cost, not revenue. It is what it is. Heck, last time I paid MSRP for a license was Win7. Since then, either MSDN or cheap stuff from whatever. We’re not a revenue sourceOf course! I myself am about to pull the trigger on a 5900X, an ASUS Strix B550-E, and some G.Skill 3600 CL16 RAM. I'm very excited about it, and I expect to notice a big difference in my games compared to my Intel 5960X (basically equivalent to Zen 1). But just because I found a use case for more CPU power, does not mean that other people who have no use for it should be prevented from upgrading to the newest OS. A lot of people are just browsing the web and going on Facebook and Youtube. Maybe they'd like to pay for a Windows 11 upgrade so that they'd be able to run an Android app that they use for work. Why stop them?
You’ve made poor life choices. Being blunt. They literally don’t expect you to pay that any more. You can thank Apple for thatThey should! I'm one of the suckers that pays $150/license for Windows Pro edition on every machine I build.
Except, desktop adoption is slowing in favor of mobile devices while Windows and MacOS morph into a touch interface as a result - So obviously Windows is not what they want.It wins, because that's what people want. Do you not remember when the big PC builders offered Linux? It was a disaster. Hobbyists are not a major factor in the world of computing. It's business followed by consumers (or maybe Education and then Consumers).
And as someone who's worked on Unix and Linux at work, it's a fine OS, for the backend. It's not great for the desktop. I have no idea what touch stuff Window has, because I don't see it. But TBH, if my next monitor had a touch screen, I wouldn't object to some touch stuff built into it. As long as my mouse and keyboard also work, I'm good and so are the vast majority of PC users.
If gaming is no different under Linux then why no mass exodus of Windows already? Why are there so many that dual boot?
I also use Linux only for the running of my business and my productivity is through the roof when the OS isn't trying to update/force me onto a MS account/running slow due to malware or constantly trying to force me to use MS Teams and Skype.
"trying to update/force me onto a MS account/running slow due to malware or constantly trying to force me to use MS Teams and Skype." none of that happens except malware and we only issues with that on macs this year...To quote myself:
It's my PC, not Microsoft's PC. I am a human being, not just a consumer to manipulate and bleed dry like a hog on a hook. Furthermore, there is a mass exodus away from Windows (and MacOS) in favor of mobile devices:
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share
Probably not. TPM is only part of the equation it seems. Windows 10 already have support for higher security with VBS and it seems MS is making some of it mandatory for all users now. Considering how end users have moved to one point of login for many services on devices from phones, PCs and tablets, having higher security from get go seems like the right way to go. There is a lot that needs to be sandboxed, from apps to the windows kernel itself, so MS is not that wrong setting a new hardware floor to make sure Win11 can do that properly from boot.Maybe they can qualify Nehalem if they throw something in the EULA to the effect of "don't get mad at us because you can't run android apps, or you got hacked by Fancy Bear because you didn't have TPM and your password was "password"
"trying to update/force me onto a MS account/running slow due to malware or constantly trying to force me to use MS Teams and Skype." none of that happens except malware and we only issues with that on macs this year...
To quote myself:
It's my PC, not Microsoft's PC. I am a human being, not just a consumer to manipulate and bleed dry like a hog on a hook. Furthermore, there is a mass exodus away from Windows (and MacOS) in favor of mobile devices:
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share
This is why Linux has such an issue. Good luck with tech support. It only works when you walled garden the system.People use Windows/MacOS/ChromeOS/Android/iOS because it's what comes on the equipment they purchase.
You are welcome to try to make convincing arguments otherwise though.
A lot of times they really don't. You all have phones don't you? The iPhone 12 Pro marketing failure. You gotta remember that corporations are run by people and people in general are really stupid.They know more than you do about market trends.
What's the benefit of buying an ARM Mac? Battery life? Faster response time? Most users are not going to notice these benefits in the grand scheme of things, but they will notice their older x86 applications are now slower, and some Windows apps don't work. If a significant number of people need to run Windows then there's going to be a significant number of Mac users who need to run Windows apps.There's a significant number of people who need Windows, but that doesn't mean they're hurting Mac sales. How many of those people own Macs or had ever considered them? Most people who absolutely need Windows... buy Windows PCs. This limits Apple's potential audience with ARM-based Macs in the picture, but it doesn't mean that Mac growth is stunted, either. The missed sales from "I absolutely need Windows, but for some reason I bought a Mac" camp may be more than offset by the people who decide a more powerful ARM Mac is also a better value.
You don't buy a Chromebook to use it as a laptop but to use it as a tablet with a built in keyboard. It's purely for watching movies and browsing the web and nothing more. For most people this is fine.Quite a few Chromebooks are ARM-based. Samsung, ASUS, Lenovo and others all make them. While they're typically low end, that's also where Chromebooks are most appealing.
Yea, because ARM isn't designed for desktop use. Not yet anyway. Plus there's the issue with software compatibility.You don't see many ARM-based Windows laptops, but that's because.... well, Windows on ARM sucks, both due to the sluggish hardware and inferior software experience.
Yea but why not AMD's Ryzen instead? It's not like Apple had to retool everything if they went Ryzen. Plus competition between AMD and Intel would lower prices for Apple. The decision to go ARM was a selfish one that doesn't have Apple's customers best interest.There is a degree of lock-in involved with Apple's move, but the more logical explanation is that Apple saw Intel's struggles as holding it back. Remember, Apple was struggling to deliver meaningful updates to the Mac line as Intel couldn't move past 14nm, and wasn't doing much better with 10nm; this was Apple's chance to clear that bottleneck and potentially claim a performance advantage (which, so far, it has).
Doesn't seem to be paying off when Apple is #2 in worldwide sales. I predict that Apple will go back to x86, at least for a short while because their ARM software is not mature enough yet.Apple's golden rule is to avoid relying too heavily on another company for its success. That's why Safari and many first-party creative apps exist, why its mobile devices have been using in-house chips for years, why it's developing its own modems... you get the idea. Intel's struggles just gave Apple a strong incentive to cut that dependence on outside PC chips, too. It's definitely more of a gamble than the PPC-to-Intel switch was, but the decision appears to be paying off.
Microsoft would be making a huge mistake to dump older hardware to avoid technical support. That older hardware isn't going anywhere either. To lose that much market share would be a huge mistake. Many companies like Google would like that kind of market share on the Desktop.Because they’re not paying for an upgrade. You don’t pay for upgrades. Not since windows 7. Not a revenue source. It’s all about the Benjamin’s. In this case, things 5+ years old are not really generating cash, but do generate support problems. That’s a cost, not revenue. It is what it is. Heck, last time I paid MSRP for a license was Win7. Since then, either MSDN or cheap stuff from whatever. We’re not a revenue source
Linux, Android, pretty much all OS's don't charge a fee. Apple isn't unique in that regard.You’ve made poor life choices. Being blunt. They literally don’t expect you to pay that any more. You can thank Apple for that
Valve is very much interested in improving the usability of Linux for plebs. It's been their goal for many years now.This is why Linux has such an issue. Good luck with tech support. It only works when you walled garden the system.
For the general consumption anyway. People who develop Linux have 0 interest in improving the usability for plebs
The argument was that Microsoft was forcing "everybody" to upgrade to Windows 10, when that was clearly not the case. With 8.1 Pro there was no special process I had to go through to prevent the upgrade to Windows 10.It is revisionist. Sure the people in this forum know enough to watch for shady shit but how much of the population is made up of people like us? A minuscule amount.
How many people out there clicked the red X thinking that would make Win10 NOT install? Far more than the people like us on this forum. Let's not play semantics here. MS pulled some really shady shit with getting Win10 to install and that most certainly lead to Win10 being automatically installed WITHOUT THE USERS PERMISSION. Period.
MS fucked many people in the ass without so much as the courtesy of a reach around. I won't even bring up how many of those people who were upgraded without permission also didn't understand what they were doing when they tied their Yahoo/AOL/Gmail/insertaccount here to the MS account that was touted during Win10 setup.
Bottom line is MS is again trying to pull a fast one simply because it benefits their pocket book, yet so many people out there are excusing it and then using revisionist history with Win10 to justify their excuses.
This is a place where the open source community is so much better than the Windows community. When the FOSS community sees stupid shady shit they raise holy hell and it forces change. Look at the backlash Ubuntu had when they added the Amazon stuff a few years back. Look at the brouhaha around Audacity in recent weeks. Muse Group has been backpedaling for weeks with the new privacy policy, GPL violations, and telemetry they're trying to add. Due to the extreme backlash distros now have the ability to set a simple flag to not include the telemetry bullshit. There's also a possibility that Audacity will simply be forked and the telemetry shit not even available at all.
That type of backlash is what we need against MS but instead people just excuse it all away and MS goes about their day. I mean come on it's stupid for my Intel i7-6820HQ in my Dell Precision 5510 to not be supported. How anybody could try to argue that a quad core with 8 threads @ 3.6 is too slow to run Windows 11 is beyond comprehension. It also isn't because of something like Spectre/Meltdown. That's just a cop out and a bullshit excuse. Like others have said MS is simply forcing obsolescence to try to artificially boost PC sales which means more money for them.
That's not true. You may "feel" it's true. But I can promise you (without a doubt) it is not true.This is why Linux has such an issue. Good luck with tech support. It only works when you walled garden the system.
For the general consumption anyway. People who develop Linux have 0 interest in improving the usability for plebs
Er... wait, what? People aren't going to notice that their systems are noticeably snappier, or that they don't have to plug in quite so often? The most common gripes that prompt laptop upgrades are "it's too slow" and "battery life is terrible." Yes, they will notice these improvements.What's the benefit of buying an ARM Mac? Battery life? Faster response time? Most users are not going to notice these benefits in the grand scheme of things, but they will notice their older x86 applications are now slower, and some Windows apps don't work. If a significant number of people need to run Windows then there's going to be a significant number of Mac users who need to run Windows apps.
No, it's because Windows on ARM, specifically, sucks. The chips are old, warmed-over parts; Microsoft has done a poor job of both fostering ARM app development and ensuring compatibility; it's a disgrace that 64-bit x86 emulation wasn't on the cards from day one.Yea, because ARM isn't designed for desktop use. Not yet anyway. Plus there's the issue with software compatibility.
I can think of a few reasons. Most likely, Apple didn't think AMD was guaranteed to be a viable long-term solution. Remember how AMD briefly toppled Intel with early Athlon chips, only to lose its lead for years? Ryzen is doing well now, but it would be foolish of Apple to shift all its weight behind AMD only to have to consider flipping back if AMD trips up.Yea but why not AMD's Ryzen instead? It's not like Apple had to retool everything if they went Ryzen. Plus competition between AMD and Intel would lower prices for Apple. The decision to go ARM was a selfish one that doesn't have Apple's customers best interest.
It won't any time soon. Count on it.Doesn't seem to be paying off when Apple is #2 in worldwide sales. I predict that Apple will go back to x86, at least for a short while because their ARM software is not mature enough yet.
It makes sense when those using older hardware aren’t generating you revenue. Market share is not a significant metric at the moment; revenue and cash flow is, and their revenue/cash flow/margins are made on cloud, services, and enterprise agreements. Home users stick with it because it’s compatible with what they use at work.A lot of times they really don't. You all have phones don't you? The iPhone 12 Pro marketing failure. You gotta remember that corporations are run by people and people in general are really stupid.
What's the benefit of buying an ARM Mac? Battery life? Faster response time? Most users are not going to notice these benefits in the grand scheme of things, but they will notice their older x86 applications are now slower, and some Windows apps don't work. If a significant number of people need to run Windows then there's going to be a significant number of Mac users who need to run Windows apps.
You don't buy a Chromebook to use it as a laptop but to use it as a tablet with a built in keyboard. It's purely for watching movies and browsing the web and nothing more. For most people this is fine.
Yea, because ARM isn't designed for desktop use. Not yet anyway. Plus there's the issue with software compatibility.
Yea but why not AMD's Ryzen instead? It's not like Apple had to retool everything if they went Ryzen. Plus competition between AMD and Intel would lower prices for Apple. The decision to go ARM was a selfish one that doesn't have Apple's customers best interest.
Doesn't seem to be paying off when Apple is #2 in worldwide sales. I predict that Apple will go back to x86, at least for a short while because their ARM software is not mature enough yet.
Microsoft would be making a huge mistake to dump older hardware to avoid technical support. That older hardware isn't going anywhere either. To lose that much market share would be a huge mistake. Many companies like Google would like that kind of market share on the Desktop.
Linux, Android, pretty much all OS's don't charge a fee. Apple isn't unique in that regard.
Valve is very much interested in improving the usability of Linux for plebs. It's been their goal for many years now.
It is and it isn’t. They’re definitely making efforts to improve it, but the bar is set differently.That's not true. You may "feel" it's true. But I can promise you (without a doubt) it is not true.
I would really like to believe that, but can you prove it?That's not true. You may "feel" it's true. But I can promise you (without a doubt) it is not true.
sudo 12o;i4u1q23890-45701239puithakl;sdjghw90p4785 1q235890yu2134908572349-87awdkil;awdeg689 7834t q8jkilopasdf opiasdut890- 23745 uq235uioy234590-8712345790-[u12345 2345890 723457890- werioptju349op58340-2985 234578=9902345890-23457=903469o[ui23467890qwetjio;asdgjkl;asdgf7y8=90235 23589=0123458=90 2345890u890aswdet
AMD will sell and ship some 4-6 million Ryzen CPU’s in a year, combined to private and OEM contractors.Yea but why not AMD's Ryzen instead? It's not like Apple had to retool everything if they went Ryzen. Plus competition between AMD and Intel would lower prices for Apple. The decision to go ARM was a selfish one that doesn't have Apple's customers best interest.
Technically its TSMC that supplies everyone in this regard. If AMD was contracted to, and TSMC could produce it, AMD would have no issue supplying any number of chipsAMD is not capable of providing somebody like Apple enough CPU’s to meet their demand.
Yes. Because, I'm not lying and I work on open source projects. In fact, I don't think there are too many developers working on frontend pieces that aren't at least indirectly involved on making things easier.I would really like to believe that, but can you prove it?
I suppose it's not fair to lump all Linux developers into the same pile, and if you are constantly working towards improving usability for people who don't care how the inner workings of the OS work you should be applauded and supported.Yes. Because, I'm not lying and I work on open source projects. In fact, I don't think there are too many developers working on frontend pieces that aren't at least indirectly involved on making things easier.
I'm puzzled that anyone would think so.
I am open to direct Windows vs. Linux challenges though, if not for anything to show where developers (the apparent liars of the bunch) need to work harder.
Code wise, I work on (I contribute on a lot of things though):I suppose it's not fair to lump all Linux developers into the same pile, and if you are constantly working towards improving usability for people who don't care how the inner workings of the OS work you should be applauded and supported.
However that isn't proof.
Which application do you work on?