(don't get smart with me about that always being MS's strategy, I'm forty-two years old and have been using computers my whole life, I know that perfectly well, but this is much more blatant than usual.)
Show this thread
so the requirements doc for MS's Win11 launch site just said "literally copy Apple, don't even pretend", huhpic.twitter.com/Mllq6zCu0v
-
-
-
anyway the secure boot and TPM 2.0 requirements are much worse than the aesthetics
Show this thread -
requiring Secure Boot and TPM is Microsoft leveraging their existing (effective) monopoly power and high degree of customer lock-in to reduce your ownership over your own things that you buy with your own money, and increase the degree of lock-in so you can't easily escape.
Show this thread -
it sucks and it's frustrating. these technologies don't help consumers, but they're sold and promoted with dishonest language that most people don't have the expertise to see through, or the background knowledge to recognize the harmful ramifications.
Show this thread -
SB/TPM requirements prevent a lot of people who build their own computers from upgrading to Windows 11, make it harder to dual-boot with Linux or other OSes, and push consumers to a more passive, Apple-like, no-user-serviceable-parts-inside, buy-a-new-one-every-2-years model
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.