Comment by matja

Comment by matja 4 days ago

If you bypass the installer minimum hardware checks then you're making a gamble that the official statement from Microsoft won't affect you:

> If Windows 11 is installed on ineligible hardware, your device won't receive support from Microsoft, and you should be comfortable assuming the risk of running into compatibility issues.

> Devices that don't meet these system requirements might malfunction due to compatibility or other issues. Additionally, these devices aren't guaranteed to receive updates, including but not limited to security updates.

hparadiz 4 days ago

Aren't you guys actually talking about a TPM 2.0 device being present on the machine and not a CPU specifically? Cause the whole Windows 11 thing was (I thought) full disk encryption with TPM 2.0 attestation booted from a secure boot BIOS. That basically just means you can't take the disk and boot it on another machine. There would be no way to decrypt.

Reply View 12 replies

ploxiln 4 days ago

Windows 11 officially requires TPM 2.0, secure-boot enabled, and an AMD Zen+ (Ryzen 2xxx) or later or an Intel Core Gen 8 or later.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/10/windows-11-the-ars-t...
> ... the best rationale for the processor requirement is that these chips (mostly) support something called “mode-based execution control,” or MBEC. MBEC provides hardware acceleration for an optional memory integrity feature in Windows (also known as hypervisor-protected code integrity, or HVCI) that can be enabled on any Windows 10 or Windows 11 PC but can come with hefty performance penalties for older processors without MBEC support.
> Another theory: older processors are more likely to be running in old systems that haven’t had their firmware updated to mitigate major hardware-level vulnerabilities that have been discovered in the last few years, like Spectre and Meltdown

Reply View | 0 replies
tosti 4 days ago

You can use a TPM for disk encryption with Linux if you want. You also get to use your own secureboot keys if you want. Your choice.
I can't be bothered. My 80386 worked fine without any of the above and I still don't need any of it on a Zen%d (except Linux)

Reply View | 8 replies
- hparadiz 4 days ago
  
  Yea I was looking at this for work. We require full disk encryption for all operating systems but linux is the one where it's a passphrase or a yubikey. In my personal life it would just make managing my PC more annoying. Imagine a motherboard failure and boom there goes my entire disk.
  
  Reply View | 7 replies
  
  vladvasiliu 4 days ago
  
  You can have automatic unlock with tpm2, with or without a pin, in addition to passphrase, file, fido2, pkcs#11 cert, or whatever else is supported by luks.
  I've been using this for a few years now, and never had an issue.
  https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Systemd-cryptenroll
  > Imagine a motherboard failure and boom there goes my entire disk.
  You can also set a long-ass key in addition to the other methods, and back it up somewhere safe. It works the same as bitlocker: you have key which can decrypt the drive without external help from a TPM in case something goes wrong.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
  
  jacquesm 4 days ago
  
  Yubikeys are very useful. I was pointed to them by a colleague and was a bit skeptical in the beginning but since then I am more than happy to use them, absolutely flawless execution. The only thing that I am a bit concerned about is that it isn't the key that I place on the device that governs all this so you can't be 100% sure that there isn't some kind of supply chain trick that would allow the manufacturer or one or more of their employees to create duplicate keys.
  
  Reply View | 2 replies
  
  Terr_ 4 days ago
  
  > Imagine a motherboard failure
  Hold up, I'm no expert on Secure Boot, but LUKS allows you to have multiple entry keys to the same drive.
  This means you can have one key of random gobbledegook which is kept and auto-used by the magic motherboard, and also a passphrase that you can memorize or write down, and either one is totally sufficient on its own.
  You don't even need to set them up at the same time, you can start with one and then add the other as an option later.
  
  Reply View | 2 replies
RajT88 4 days ago

I have a few machines which lack a supported CPU. There's CPU's only 6 years old which aren't supported. There may be some newer ones even (I didn't bother to look).
If it was 2000 - it'd be like, "OK boss, you gotta upgrade that old dog of a CPU", but software bloat really hasn't kept up with CPU performance. I've got an i3 which is serviceable enough from 2014. Is it going to be able to keep up with modern SQL Server and Teams and VSCode and all that? Probably not all at once. But totally fine for basic computing.

Reply View | 0 replies
jacquesm 4 days ago

For some reason that risk never seemed larger than the one that Microsoft would force me into subscribing to more services because they hold my data hostage or that they would be more than happy to pass the keys to my machine to the USG.

Reply View | 0 replies

jodrellblank 4 days ago

But if your next move is to go to Linux where all that applies as well, why would that stop you?

Reply View 2 replies

vanviegen 4 days ago

You are correct that a Linux installation is ineligible for support from Microsoft. Not that that means anything for private usage.
Also, Linux has a great track record for not dropping support for older hardware. I think that is a lot more informative than whatever statement Microsoft's legal team has managed to come up with.

Reply View | 1 reply
- jama211 a day ago
  
  No need to be obtuse, you knew what they meant.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

jama211 3 days ago

There’s no functional gamble. It’s worked fine and it will continue to work fine. Everyone is seriously overreacting, they’re just scare tactic words.

Reply View 2 replies

matja 3 days ago

Windows 11 24H2 added a dependency on the POPCNT instruction, causing CPUs that don't have it - which were otherwise fine, to fail to even boot Windows.
What will be the next instruction/ISA extension that is only supported since Intel 11th Gen that there will be a hard dependency on? Any bets?

Reply View | 1 reply
- jama211 2 days ago
  
  And they fixed it. A bug like that is a seperate category of problem entirely.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies