Windows 11 is dying....

[asmi]

But to your main point, @Zero999: I agree that Windows as an operating system is less and less valuable to Microsoft

That's not true - Windows is their foot in a door to corporate environments, which require server versions of Windows to operate this infrastructure, as well as Exchange as a de-facto standard for corporate communications. That is also their door into selling private cloud infrastructure software (the buzzword is "hyperconverged") and other server solutions. I don't know if it's their biggest cash cow (it used to be, but I don't know if it still is), but it's definitely significant enough for them.
Consumer Windows is basically a side product of that corporate Windows world, since they make very little money from it. Even corporate version of desktop Windows (I think it's now called "Windows 11 Enterprise", which is almost the same as Windows 11 Pro) is sold for peanuts due to massive volume discounts, but you need to have a certain amount of server Windows products to operate a fleet of client Windows machines - and those cost some real money if we talking about big enterprises.

[SteveThackery]

If you are honest with yourself you will have to agree that it expresses a level of incoherent rage that I have never even got close to in my posts. You are welcome to check.

Do me a favour and don't tell me what I have to think, say, or feel. That does tend to cause a more emotional response, why, in person you might even receive a one finger salute. I'm sure you'd need to report that as a death threat.

(The bolding is mine.)

You are quite right (although I know you know it's a figure of speech). But yes, I should have said, "I feel sure you will agree". Thanks for pointing it out - I'll try to keep on top of that one.

[SteveThackery]

You read extreme emotions into every word - this is called projection. Look it up.

I don't think it's obvious who is doing the projecting.

[Analog Kid]

Big bloated, spaced further apart taskbar with way to add no compact sub menu's (quicklaunch).
Nothing in my favour and all works against me.

When I saw the animated skeleton placeholders in LTSC 2021 plastered over the menu's testing it in 2022 where they'd spike a CPU core as they appear, flash then disappear and that stupid app store I considered it lost it's useful functionality to me.

Now I think it's all about them on what promotional advertising crap they can link to and dump on that taskbar to make shoving it in my face easier from that stupid appstore nevermind the things I want on there that I could put there before.

I might have a browser profile shortcut so I wonder what's that going to do?
Not copy shortcut or paste shortcut to the program with no parameters which would just load up the default browser profile if it go on there.

It's as good as dead to me.

I'll tell you what this is: it's a person who has decided in advance that he hates Windows, vomiting a stream of furious, incoherent invective as some kind of justification. I can feel the raw anger in every word!!

Y'know, Steve, it is possible for two things to be true at once:

• That previous Windoze versions, say up to 11, are actually pretty damn stable and usable (I'm very happy with W7 and intend to stay here for as long as possible)
• That Windows 11, on the other hand, is a total POS, is broken, and becoming more and more enshittified by the day (which after all is what this thread is all about)

If I were required to use Windows 11 I'd be every bit as angry and bitter that such a thing was being foisted upon me.

[SiliconWizard]

Most people don't use Windows through choice. I wonder how many Windows 11 users like it, or have even considered there might be an alternative?

Microsoft simply don't care about Windows any more. It's only around 10% of their revenue and will shrink in the future, as they invest more in data centres and AI. They don't have the same reward for investing in it as they used to. Windows has a monopoly over the desktop platform, so people aren't going to switch anytime soon. Microsoft are just going to keep running Windows into the ground by pumping it full of adware, data collection and AI in a bid to boost profits from their other sectors.

True, but the current backlash is taking epic proportions. Looks pretty serious. Even if Windows is now only a small part of their business, it's going to harm MS in terms of image. And I think it goes beyond MS. This is just showing everyone that placing all your business bets on massive AI-everywhere and unsolicited ads is making people angry.

[tatel]

You aren't - my experience is the same. To the very best of my recollection I don't think I've ever had an update break something. Also, I literally cannot remember the last time my machine had a BSOD. It has happened, definitely, but it must be a heck of an long way back - 20 years, probably.

Well I remember air transport having big troubles because of a windows update -or that's what we were told at least- much less than 20 years ago

[Zero999]

But to your main point, @Zero999: I agree that Windows as an operating system is less and less valuable to Microsoft

That's not true - Windows is their foot in a door to corporate environments, which require server versions of Windows to operate this infrastructure, as well as Exchange as a de-facto standard for corporate communications. That is also their door into selling private cloud infrastructure software (the buzzword is "hyperconverged") and other server solutions. I don't know if it's their biggest cash cow (it used to be, but I don't know if it still is), but it's definitely significant enough for them.
Consumer Windows is basically a side product of that corporate Windows world, since they make very little money from it. Even corporate version of desktop Windows (I think it's now called "Windows 11 Enterprise", which is almost the same as Windows 11 Pro) is sold for peanuts due to massive volume discounts, but you need to have a certain amount of server Windows products to operate a fleet of client Windows machines - and those cost some real money if we talking about big enterprises.

I would have agreed with you five years ago, but that no longer appears to be the case with Windows 11. I know this is anecdotal but, most people in the IT department hate Windows 11 and find it a nightmare to administer. Microsoft do appear to be starting to annoy their corporate customers.

But to your main point, @Zero999: I agree that Windows as an operating system is less and less valuable to Microsoft, and more and more a platform for generating alternate revenue streams. My cunning avoidance of its worst aspects by installing Start11 won't last, I'm sure. I can see me moving to Mint before too long, despite my dislike of most Linux apps.

What puzzles me is why Microsoft hasn't given up already and re-engineered Windows as a compatibility layer running on top of Linux. Yes, I do appreciate that such a thing would be a BIG job. But look at it like this: the people who develop WINE have got, what, maybe half way there? And that's without any assistance from Microsoft and observing the "clean room" constraints imposed by the licensing rules.

Think what Microsoft could do if they took over WINE and finished it off so it worked for the other half. Nobody knows the inner workings of Windows better, and frankly Microsoft knows the inner workings of Linux pretty well, too.

Once they'd got "super-WINE" working, they could pretty much walk away. Freeze the Windows API - every Windows app developed from then on would be bound to work forever. No need to keep messing with the Start menu or File Explorer: that's all done by Linux.

They won't do that, because it will cost a lot of money and they won't see a return on their investment.

[SteveThackery]

Y'know, Steve, it is possible for two things to be true at once:

• That previous Windoze versions, say up to 11, are actually pretty damn stable and usable (I'm very happy with W7 and intend to stay here for as long as possible)
• That Windows 11, on the other hand, is a total POS, is broken, and becoming more and more enshittified by the day (which after all is what this thread is all about)

You need to be more specific here.

I use Windows 11 every day on two different computers, and I can tell you honestly that Windows 11 is not "a total POS" and not "broken".  It's awfully like W10 with a new Start menu, task bar and minor changes to File Explorer. Honestly, you'd be surprised by how trivial and superficial the differences are between W10 and W11, from a user's perspective.

Having said that, I should point out that "a total POS" and "broken" are imprecise and undefined, so ultimately a matter of opinion. For example, imagine someone clicking on 'Start', seeing an unexpected message pop up, and immediately going on Facebook and posting "I hate Windows 11, it's a piece of shit!!"

Would you agree that it's a bit of an over-reaction to an unexpected message about OneDrive? Especially as for five bucks you need never see any of that nonsense again, PLUS you get a taskbar that works like in W10, including being able to attach it to the left side of the screen.  Yes, yes, I know you shouldn't have to pay anything to make W11 work as you want it, but it is pragmatic and almost free.

Where I do agree is that there seems to be a degree of enshittification, if being offered AI assistance counts as "shit". It's not that difficult to ignore it, to be honest. For me, though, I can imagine it eventually getting in the way enough for me to move to Mint. I can feel a mild sense of disappointment about that, not because I don't like Mint (I slightly prefer it over W11) but because I don't like most of the Linux apps I've tried.

[SteveThackery]

They won't do that, because it will cost a lot of money and they won't see a return on their investment.

In a sense they would - they could lay off the entire Windows team (almost).

[SteveThackery]

I would have agreed with you five years ago, but that no longer appears to be the case with Windows 11. I know this is anecdotal but, most people in the IT department hate Windows 11 and find it a nightmare to administer. Microsoft do appear to be starting to annoy their corporate customers.

That surprises me, to be honest. From what I've read about Windows 11, there doesn't seem to be much chat about Microsoft changing the way the OS is managed in a corporate environment. Most of the criticism seems to revolve around the changes to the UI: the Start menu and the task bar. Plus the creeping AI assistance, of course. I should say I am not involved in the corporate world so I might be completely wrong about that.

Mind you, think about the workload involved in moving all your corporate Windows users to Linux. Oof!

[Analog Kid]

That surprises me, to be honest. From what I've read about Windows 11, there doesn't seem to be much chat about Microsoft changing the way the OS is managed in a corporate environment. Most of the criticism seems to revolve around the changes to the UI: the Start menu and the task bar.

Really? What about that recent update that made user's systems unbootable?
That seems a bit more serious than just some quibbles with how the user interface looks/works.

[tatel]

Linux, by CVE count, is the most vulnerable platform on the planet, yet fanboys insist it's more secure. When confronted with that fact, they will say it's because open source allows more CVEs, but then provide no evidence.

That would be very good news to me. It would mean Linux has become mainstream. However that statement doesn't ring true to me, please see what the answer about "the most compromised OS" i got from Google, following your suggestion.

It also, in my experience, has regular breaking updates.

To me that means you are doing something wrong, like fiddling with repositories or something. No harsh critic here, but if you have "regular breaking updates", there is something wrong, no doubt about it.

Every time I turn around lately, I have to recompile the NVIDIA CUDA drivers, for instance.

Yes, of course. NVIDIA is infamously not linux friendly and you'll have to hack the support back into the kernel each time a new version (either kernel's or NVIDIA's) gets released. Should I need to use anything from NVIDIA, I would be using a windows machine.

And no Windows user ever heard of "dependency hell."

If you get in "dependency hell", you have messed up your APT. Otherwise it just works. Just leave it alone to do the work. Windows users usually have a hard time grasping that, because they aren't used to have a way to install software that does the work for them

The last big issue that caused the Windows platform pain was the virus/malware crap, maybe 10 years ago, which MS solved by purchasing and running an AV in the platform because users couldn't be bothered. Apple did the same thing with macOS, though they have regularly claimed macOS doesn't get viruses/malware.

I purchased my last Mac on 1998, so I don't know about it right now. But for me, having the antivirus hogging my system's resources is a big issue. YMMV.

I'm guessing no Linux user needs Anti-Virus or security software because they believe the myths. But Linux is the number one platform for malware, botnets, crypto-jacking, and ransomware. Just type any of these queries into google for instance:
"What is the most compromised OS?"

I just checked the first question and I got this answer from Google:

"Windows is currently the most targeted operating system for online attacks, although Linux has also faced significant vulnerabilities. The level of compromise often depends on the system administrator and the software used, rather than the OS itself"

So I didn't bothered to check the remaining questions. I still remember about melissa and i love you, when the high ranking IT staff from a basque capital city, after seeing their systems go shit, called the city music school where i was working, to ask about what antivirus we were using, and the answer was "none"

No windows user has cojones big enough to browse Internet without running an antivirus, but Linux users do, because it isn't about cojones.

[SteveThackery]

Really? What about that recent update that made user's systems unbootable?
That seems a bit more serious than just some quibbles with how the user interface looks/works.

Yes, I read about that. Do we know how many systems were affected? It's seems worryingly incompetent to me.

EDIT: Ah, yes, KB5074109. Unfortunately there is no data available on how many users were affected. Microsoft say "A limited number of reports" - make of that what you will.

I would happily agree that the quality of recent upgrades seems to be significantly worse, although without actual numbers we can't know how bad it is.

[SteveThackery]

No windows user has cojones big enough to browse Internet without running an antivirus, but Linux users do, because it isn't about cojones.

I don't suppose any Windows user does do that, do they? Windows has an antivirus built in, along with several other security elements. I've never tried switching it off. What I can tell you is that I've relied on the inbuilt security software for many years (since W7, I think) and have had no problems whatever.

Having said that, there is no doubt in my mind that Linux has always been "harder" against attack than Windows, right back to when they were both conceived.

[PlainName]

It's awfully like W10 with a new Start menu, task bar and minor changes to File Explorer. Honestly, you'd be surprised by how trivial and superficial the differences are between W10 and W11, from a user's perspective.

Don't you have to have a Microsoft account now just to install it and then log in? That's a massive difference from previous versions.

[PlainName]

Linux, by CVE count, is the most vulnerable platform on the planet, yet fanboys insist it's more secure. When confronted with that fact, they will say it's because open source allows more CVEs, but then provide no evidence.

That would be very good news to me. It would mean Linux has become mainstream. However that statement doesn't ring true to me, please see what the answer about "the most compromised OS" i got from Google, following your suggestion.

You do realise that Google answers are AI generated and could be right or very wrong, and you have no idea which (otherwise you wouldn't be asking)? You need to stop with the asking Google and then believing it as gospel.

Seriously, who is best placed to know this: the actual CVE compilers with the actual data, or Google via some copypasta pattern matching?

Further, you haven't even twigged that the answer Google gave you is to a different question than the relevant to the above? Sure, Windows has the most attacks because most PCs are Windows. But the question was how many CVEs, not how many times something was attacked.

[SteveThackery]

Don't you have to have a Microsoft account now just to install it and then log in? That's a massive difference from previous versions.

I don't know, I'm afraid. I'm happy enough to enter my MS account details - can't see the problem. After all, have you tried using an Android phone or tablet without entering your Google account details?

After installation you can create a local user account and delete the original. (I've read this - haven't tried it myself.)

[PlainName]

That's classic whataboutery, and irrelevant.

[tatel]

Sorry, not that I would have no idea. Instead I choosed to ask exactly the question suggested and that's the answer I got. Which had nothing to do with what it was supposed to be.

Now anyone can say, well, whatever. Google's AI could be wrong (or not), but I'm not naive enough to think I need to demonstrate, to any windows fanboy that, having the source code  accessible to anyone, will inevitably mean more vulnerabilities are uncovered.

That's quite different from being the most vulnerable OS, and, as Google's answer point out, the most attacked. OTOH, one could say the most compromised OS is the one with the most effected machines. To me that argument, and others stated in the same post, sweat bad faith and desperation through each pore. It's really funny.

I got my conclusion a couple decades ago, and it is good enough for me. Windows diehard guys can spew all bullshit they want on threads like this. It doesn't matter, because the trend is very clear.

Two decades ago windows gurus just laughed at linux. Not anymore.

[Analog Kid]

After all, have you tried using an Android phone or tablet without entering your Google account details?

I have an Android phone. I never do anything that requires any Google account on it.
Of course, that's because I only use it as a phone (phone & texting).
I may have had to set one up when I bought it (can't remember), but now it's nothing but an unused vestige.

[tatel]

have you tried using an Android phone or tablet without entering your Google account details?

Just put LineageOS -which is still android- on it, and you won't need any google account. At all.

[Cyclotron]

Linux, by CVE count, is the most vulnerable platform on the planet, yet fanboys insist it's more secure. When confronted with that fact, they will say it's because open source allows more CVEs, but then provide no evidence.

That would be very good news to me. It would mean Linux has become mainstream. However that statement doesn't ring true to me, please see what the answer about "the most compromised OS" i got from Google, following your suggestion.

Glad you have good news, I guess? Here's your trophy, most CVEs. Yay.

It also, in my experience, has regular breaking updates.

To me that means you are doing something wrong, like fiddling with repositories or something. No harsh critic here, but if you have "regular breaking updates", there is something wrong, no doubt about it.

This is ignorant and likely due to your inexperience. Do you do any real work on your system or just use a browser?

Every time I turn around lately, I have to recompile the NVIDIA CUDA drivers, for instance.

Yes, of course. NVIDIA is infamously not linux friendly and you'll have to hack the support back into the kernel each time a new version (either kernel's or NVIDIA's) gets released. Should I need to use anything from NVIDIA, I would be using a windows machine.

You are obviously not doing any modern application development or anything related to AI.

And no Windows user ever heard of "dependency hell."

If you get in "dependency hell", you have messed up your APT. Otherwise it just works. Just leave it alone to do the work. Windows users usually have a hard time grasping that, because they aren't used to have a way to install software that does the work for them

I'm as much a Windows user as you're not a Linux user, which is to say, uhm, no.  If you've not been in dependency hell, you don't do any development on the platform. Are you just using a browser?

The last big issue that caused the Windows platform pain was the virus/malware crap, maybe 10 years ago, which MS solved by purchasing and running an AV in the platform because users couldn't be bothered. Apple did the same thing with macOS, though they have regularly claimed macOS doesn't get viruses/malware.

I purchased my last Mac on 1998, so I don't know about it right now. But for me, having the antivirus hogging my system's resources is a big issue. YMMV.

So you have no idea if you're infected or not. That's the oblivious nature of fanboys. Security software "hogging" system resources?  What is this 2002?

I'm guessing no Linux user needs Anti-Virus or security software because they believe the myths. But Linux is the number one platform for malware, botnets, crypto-jacking, and ransomware. Just type any of these queries into google for instance:
"What is the most compromised OS?"

I just checked the first question and I got this answer from Google:

"Windows is currently the most targeted operating system for online attacks, although Linux has also faced significant vulnerabilities. The level of compromise often depends on the system administrator and the software used, rather than the OS itself"

So I didn't bothered to check the remaining questions. I still remember about melissa and i love you, when the high ranking IT staff from a basque capital city, after seeing their systems go shit, called the city music school where i was working, to ask about what antivirus we were using, and the answer was "none"

This is the nature of fanboys, I'm not surprised. But the truth is, you did check those questions. Didn't ya?

No windows user has cojones big enough to browse Internet without running an antivirus, but Linux users do, because it isn't about cojones.

So, is it your "cojones" you want to talk about?  Let's see what conjones you have.
How about you bring your cojones and your Linux machine to Def Con, Black Hat, or RSA? I'll be at all three. Maybe we can even make a bet? If you can remain unhacked, I'll buy your ticket and accommodations.  How does that sound? 

[Cyclotron]

Sorry, not that I would have no idea. Instead I choosed to ask exactly the question suggested and that's the answer I got. Which had nothing to do with what it was supposed to be.

Now anyone can say, well, whatever. Google's AI could be wrong (or not), but I'm not naive enough to think I need to demonstrate, to any windows fanboy that, having the source code  accessible to anyone, will inevitably mean more vulnerabilities are uncovered.

That's quite different from being the most vulnerable OS, and, as Google's answer point out, the most attacked. OTOH, one could say the most compromised OS is the one with the most effected machines. To me that argument, and others stated in the same post, sweat bad faith and desperation through each pore. It's really funny.

I got my conclusion a couple decades ago, and it is good enough for me. Windows diehard guys can spew all bullshit they want on threads like this. It doesn't matter, because the trend is very clear.

Two decades ago windows gurus just laughed at linux. Not anymore.

Two decades ago, no Windows "gurus" laughed at Linux. Where did you get that?  This seems more emotional to you than it should be. Why is that?
2 decades ago, I was an HPUX, AIX, Solaris Administrator and worked on multimillion-dollar UNIX systems. I can guarantee we made fun of Linux and Windows. Many of my friends still do. I think that both OSes have come a long way. Much of Linux's design was taken from Solaris and BSD. If you want security, you are a real *NIX nerd who knows there's no place like NetBSD. There's a reason that NetBSD was the OS that ran IRC networks. There's a reason the TCP stack in NetBSD was outright copied into both Linux and Windows. Oh yeah, BSD is better than Linux. That ought to trigger you.

[soldar]

I have an Android phone. I never do anything that requires any Google account on it.
Of course, that's because I only use it as a phone (phone & texting).
I may have had to set one up when I bought it (can't remember), but now it's nothing but an unused vestige.

Just put LineageOS -which is still android- on it, and you won't need any google account. At all.

I also have Android phones that I only use as a phone, mainly because I do not want to be in the "googlesphere".

I looked into installing LineageOS or other similar OS but it is not simple and I am not going to spend a lot of time on it. It is most definitely not for your average, non technical, user. I asked at several repair places how much they would charge me to do it and none of them would do it at all.

I totally dislike the environment where I need to have a Google account to download and use apps, etc.

Unlike Linux Mint which I download and install and run anonymously and can download and run all sorts of software anonymously.  I am very satisfied with Mint which I have been using for over ten years now. I update what I want when I want. No forced updates. I totally control my computer.

I wish there was a similar environment for phones.

[nctnico]

Most people don't use Windows through choice. I wonder how many Windows 11 users like it, or have even considered there might be an alternative?

Microsoft simply don't care about Windows any more. It's only around 10% of their revenue and will shrink in the future, as they invest more in data centres and AI. They don't have the same reward for investing in it as they used to. Windows has a monopoly over the desktop platform, so people aren't going to switch anytime soon. Microsoft are just going to keep running Windows into the ground by pumping it full of adware, data collection and AI in a bid to boost profits from their other sectors.

At first glance, this seems easy to agree with. I believe that this generalization was once absolutely true. But, I don't think it survives today as it may have in in the past.

At the companies I have worked for over the past 15 years, since macOS became an option, people have had a choice at work. That choice lands with Windows about the same amount of time as you see it depicted in the consumer market. Some even have chosen not to use Windows or macOS and instead use their phones or tablets. Those options and more are available. Over the last 6 years, I've seen virtual desktops as an option, so you can run whatever you like and use the corporate computer as a remote VM. In the past 10 years, I've worked at companies that have 10k users, 30 users, and now 5k users.  I also visit and talk to companies across the size spectrum.

Linux isn't an option because it isn't fleet manageable. Companies spend a lot of money trying to secure it as a server, and they are not going to try to do it on a desktop because it's not manageable.

I strongly doubt that. It actually is the business model of Redhat: supply secure and manageable Linux for both server and workstation. But it ain't free.