Will Microsoft drop the TPM requirement for Win 11 once Win 12 rolls around?
Or maybe they will launch Win 12 with optional TPM support.
Imho making the OS(es) TPM only cannot be good for their business, many people are still on Win 10 with no intention to switch, since their motheboard does not support TPM and do not want to upgrade PC / waste PCI-E slot on TPM extension.
You're viewing a single thread.
The way Microsoft phrases it, it's way more ubiquitous than you make it out:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/what-is-tpm-705f241d-025d-4470-80c5-4feeb24fa1ee
"TPM has been around for over 20 years, and has been part of PCs since around 2005. In 2016 TPM version 2.0 - the current version as of this writing - became standard in new PCs.
The odds are that your PC does already have TPM, and if it's less than 5 years old you should have TPM 2.0.
To find out if your Windows 10 PC already has it go to Start > Settings > Update and Security > Windows Security > Device Security. If you have it, you'll see a Security processor section on the screen."
So when they say:
"Important: Windows 11 requires TPM version 2.0."
They're requiring a standard established 7 years ago. Windows 11 launched in 2021, why WOULDN'T it require something from 2016?
You really want to run an OS from 2021 on hardware older than 2016? That's not going to be a good idea, TPM or not.
Probably worth noting that TPM often needs to be enabled in the motherboard’s BIOS. It’s possible that OP has it already, but got the “you don’t have TPM” error when trying to upgrade to Win11, simply because it isn’t activated in their BIOS.
Also worth noting that people may have access to TPM through their CPU, notably AMD Rysens... And that some of those were plagued for a while with very bad performance issues when it was activated.
It's supposed to be fixed now, but only if you got the right BIOS updates. Not sure myself, I kinda gave up on TPM and Windows 11 on my current hardware.
The way things are going, honestly my next PC will probably have TPM because it'll have a newer motherboard, but I am not ruling out not having Windows on it.
Yup, seems likely given how it's baked in and has been baked in for years.
Problem is, i havent enabled my TPM and don't plan to, either.
TPM just gives your PC a non-spoofable fingerprint so Microsoft can always identify your PC. It's simply a DRM-device built into your PC.
Your PC is already identifiable by the license key, the hardware installed, and you signing in with a Microsoft Account. If you're that worried about gummint tracking or something, you shouldn't even be gaming on your PC, as games and game stores have a lot of data to leak about you and what you're doing on the PC.
i don't sign-in to my systems with a microsoft account. hell, i don't even have one. nowadays, i dunno if i could even get one--and maintain it, as i do not have, nor want, an sms-capable or 'smart' phone. they don't do 'verification' bullshit by voice anymore, just sms.
Just because you haven't enabled it doesn't mean it's not available. If you want a modern operating system, that's the "you must be this tall to ride this ride."
You mean a massively patched windows 2000 with modern OS? Does Linux count, or BSD? How about macOS?
Linux if you're prepared to support it entirely yourself and still have functional issues.
MacOS if you want to pay 3x the price for hardware that's 1/2 as capable and has locked you out of modifications.
Linux if you’re prepared to support it entirely yourself
What does this even mean? The most work caused in administering my company's IT comes from destructive patches from Microsoft. Just like a month ago they released a security patch that caused the domain controller to not reboot which is pretty much the worst thing you can run into aside outright malicious actors (not sure Microsoft doesn't count as one). So I had to "support" users by rolling back untested shit until a hotfix was released.
My private setup runs exclusively on Linux. Patches also sometimes cause trouble but it's just as infrequent and less destructive if it happens.
It's really not that different from an admin point of view but it's not Linux' business model to snoop on or extort you or to force proprietary hardware on you because sEcUrItY.
Two days ago I spent the whole day rebuilding a linux server because an update ate the system. This is not a Microsoft specific issue.
Just nobody talks about that - it’s all wonderful in the land of Linux. A breeze managing 600+ laptops used by non-it-literate execs. No error all the time!
My favorite is when the sssd package maintainers don't properly update their dependencies, so when some of the packages get updated, they don't pull in others, and then I'm not able to log in with my external account.
Here's what I'm going to say here. With Windows it's very easy to make it a very slow running/system with problems. But, it's generally quite hard to entirely break it such that you cannot get to the GUI and attempt to fix it.
With Linux, just updating will sometimes break the system to the extent that if you're lucky it will boot to a terminal. I'm experienced with linux (since the 1990s) and I've had linux systems that took my a better part of a day to fix. Someone that just wants to turn it on and work is going to be lost trying to fix this kind of thing.
Ubuntu upgrades from one release to another are extremely hit and miss in my experience and again if you don't know how to pick up a failed upgrade and complete it, then fix the broken dependencies, fix the upgraded stuff that doesn't like your old config files, etc etc. You're going to be in trouble.
Linux is objectively better in every way except when it goes wrong. This is one of the reasons normal users won't adopt it en-masse.
Windows upgrades from one version to the other are also a hot mess, so I don't think that's a knock against Linux. I just think everyone sucks at in place upgrades, maybe not Mac but I have little experience there.
I'd much rather reinstall windows fresh than upgrade a 7 machine to 10 to be on a supported OS. Going from 10 to 11 uninstalled most of my apps and still resulted in a janky system.
Rolling distros don't have this same problem because there aren't really versions but they have a whole bunch of new and different problems. I still prefer rolling for personal systems though.
Mac has its problems too. Apparently there was an issue with upgrading to macOS Sonoma or booting Asahi Linux on certain MacBooks if ProMotion was disabled or something like that, which essentially "bricked" the laptop.
All operating systems have their odd bugs and snags.
You really want to run an OS from 2021 on hardware older than 2016? That's not going to be a good idea, TPM or not.
Why?
10+ years of usage for a PC or laptop is completely normal outside the gamere/tech enthusiast bubble.
If you only use your PC for Amazon, Streaming and occasionally Word/Excel, a 10yo laptop is totally enough.
Because old hardware doesn't keep up with new system specs. There's only so much you can upgrade and replace.
Technically, yeah, I can run Mac OSX on my Rev. B Bondi Blue iMac. Should I? No. Not if I want a modicum of a usable device.
That's an argument that wouldn't even hit a barn door from a step away.
It's an argument based on working in tech for 40 years.
Old as fuck machines can absolutely still work so long as you continue using old as fuck software.
If you want the latest, you have to upgrade.
Yep, it's an argument outdated by about 20 years. At that time 10 years difference between two machines meant that you had completely different machine.
But having a good 10yo machine now means it's about on the same level as an entry-level machine now. My laptop I bought in 2013 for ~€700 had an i7 4th gen, which is totally fast enough for non-gaming usage, 8GB RAM, 500GB SSD and a dGPU that's still faster than most iGPUs.
That are specs you can still find in modern entry-level PCs.
And that laptop has no issue running Win10 at all and if I workaround the arbitrary requirement for TPM2 and Intel Gen 8, it also runs fine. But I don't want to risk that Microsoft sometime arbitrarily decides to not give me updates any more.
And also, the argument that it's not a good choice to run a modern OS on a 25yo machine is a pretty dumb counter against the argument that a 10yo machine can run a modern OS without issue.
we still run win10 at the office on dual core wolfdale systems. they mostly now have 8gb ram and sata ssd. they run great. wolfdale launched in 2008, seven years before win10 was released.
i also have win11 set up on ivy bridge and haswell, that are also running very well. used daily for everything from basic office tasks, email with local multi-gigabyte mail stores, to video capture and editing. these are even older in relation to win11 than wolfdale is to win10.
the main issue is microsoft has unilaterally and arbitrarily decided that all these systems, all the way up to kaby lake (which was only discontinued by intel in 2020), which are usable by many, if not most, users for the tasks they perform are now 'obsolete'.... all in the name of profits for them and their oem partners.
It's hard to avoid. People here just have been removed about tpm because Linux distro maintainers don't want to jump through hoops signing their shit. This problem doesn't exist outside of Linux forums and people with absurdly old hardware.
Wrong. Linux has supported TPM2.0 for ages before even Windows and every distro maintainer would gladly sign their shit. The problem is that a shitload of hardware only accepts Microsoft TPM keys by default which can't legally be used by Linux distributions, forcing the work onto the users. It's pure vendor lock-in.
\
Also, this is going to be a way less of an issue when UKI's become the standard.
As I recall it, and correct me if I am wrong; but Linux and Distros are given keys to use? So if they want to they can revoke those keys and you could only install a Windows operating system?
The the default keys on the hardware, e.g. the keys hardcoded to the motherboard are 95+% of the time only the Microsoft Windows one's.
\
Even if the distro maintainers & developers had everything configured by default to be signed which is a pain in the ass without UKI's, it still requires the user to add new keys manually.
Rarely do you have hardware with a key for a Linux distribution, and even if you managed to get hardware that has them, the majority of the time it's only keys for stuff like RHEL, Ubuntu Enterprise Edition, etc.
So if they want to they can revoke those keys
That's generally not possible, but I imagine if the BIOS is Internet capable it could be.
and you could only install a Windows operating system.
Nope. TPM isn't required to be able to install the system, only to take advantage of secure boot and security features of the hardware.