Windows as a Service (WaaS) is coming.

[TheinsanegamerN]

Technically new systems are more energy efficient. Remember they are talking Carbon Emissions, not garbage.

Its weasel wording sure, but hardly a lie.

Disagree, its still a lie. Yes, new systems are more energy efficient, but for consumer loads, there's little difference between an old haswell rig and a new rig in terms of energy use. Is that, at most, 40w difference in energy usage an hour going to offset all the energy spent to mine the metals, make the processors, assemble the boards, ship all this stuff around the globe and back, and the fuel used to deliver it to your door? How many hours straight would you need to be using a computer to make all that energy up?

The math dont work chief. The carbon outputs are still lower just by keeping your old rig. That's why recycling is the third of the Rs. You're always supposed to reduce or reuse first.

Just like CAFE regulations rewarding car makers for making more 15 MPG half ton trucks instead of 30 MPG mini trucks, this "carbon reduction" is only about the instantaneous under rigged conditions, not the overall carbon emissions.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Disagree, its still a lie. Yes, new systems are more energy efficient, but for consumer loads, there's little difference between an old haswell rig and a new rig in terms of energy use. Is that, at most, 40w difference in energy usage an hour going to offset all the energy spent to mine the metals, make the processors, assemble the boards, ship all this stuff around the globe and back, and the fuel used to deliver it to your door? How many hours straight would you need to be using a computer to make all that energy up?

The math dont work chief. The carbon outputs are still lower just by keeping your old rig. That's why recycling is the third of the Rs. You're always supposed to reduce or reuse first.

Just like CAFE regulations rewarding car makers for making more 15 MPG half ton trucks instead of 30 MPG mini trucks, this "carbon reduction" is only about the instantaneous under rigged conditions, not the overall carbon emissions.

Also keep in mind the same amount of time and resources went into the system people are about to cast aside for that new, more efficient one. I'm typing this on an Ivy Bridge-E. Rest assured, it works just fine, and I can even play games on it with a semi-modern GPU (5600XT). Another thought is just how little many PCs are probably used today in the average home. People have smartphones and tablets that only consume power while charging, and they likely have a console for gaming. I bet if you surveyed the average home, the overall usage percentage has got to be very high on the mobile devices. If so, that means the average PC is largely sitting in off or suspend mode, consuming just a small fraction of its total power budget.

 

[R-T-B]

Yeah no!
Not for the average consumer where power consumption is increasing.

For computing work accomplished yes. That's how newer process nodes work.

Disagree, its still a lie. Yes, new systems are more energy efficient, but for consumer loads, there's little difference between an old haswell rig and a new rig in terms of energy use.

It's weasel wording, not a blatant lie. Not that it matters much.

so have you put the latest windows 11 build on a 4th or 5th or 6th gen i5 with no problems??? and no mods or hacks or tweaks or anything and got it perfectly functioning? with no issues after running every single update?

That's an e-trash issue not a carbon emissions one.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Not for the average consumer where power consumption is increasing.

We have global stats that keep telling us households and companies keep using more and more power.

Bullfeathers! Doesn't anyone bother to verify their facts before spewing their nonsense? Where's your personal integrity? Don't you want your statements to factual even if your personal opinions, biases, and desires differ? Would you rather be wrong than truthful? Come on!!!!

@Vayra86 - show us where "we" have stats that say households keep using more and more power.

Here's one for you from the U.S. Energy Information Administration,

Energy use per household has declined​

The typical U.S. household today is more likely to use air-conditioning equipment, live in a larger home, and use more electronics than a typical household did 30 years ago. However, average annual site energy use per home has declined. The reasons for this decline include:

• Improvements in building insulation and materials
• Improved efficiencies of heating and cooling equipment, water heaters, refrigerators, lighting, and appliances
• Population migration to regions with lower heating demand

U.S. energy consumption fell by a record 7% in 2020.

OF COURSE, globally, energy consumption has gone up. NO ONE IS DENYING THAT. The global population is exploding therefore more and more people are consuming energy. More and more factories are needed make products those people need. Infrastructures are moving into more and more areas that previously had no electricity.

But once again, factories are more efficient, using less energy to make each unit. Appliances in our homes are more efficient. We use LED lightbulbs instead of highly inefficient incandescent. Even our power hungry computers, are more efficient when running AND when asleep.

so have you put the latest windows 11 build on a 4th or 5th or 6th gen i5 with no problems??? and no mods or hacks or tweaks or anything and got it perfectly functioning?

What does that have to do with anything? Particularly, how does any of that suggest anyone was FORCED to buy that new hardware and then FORCED to upgrade to W11? It doesn't.

with no issues after running every single update?

FTR, I have never, not once, had a Windows Update brick any of my computers - not ever! I have had a few updates over the years fail to install for various reasons, but the computer kept running. The worse case was a system lockup that was completely cleared by a simple reboot. Regardless, these events have NOTHING to do being "forced" to upgrade to W11 or being "forced" to buy new hardware. So your point is, as related to this thread's topic is, frankly, pointless.

Given you're still running W10 (according to your profile), you obviously won't have been "forced" to upgrade to W11 since you aren't even running it...

On this computer, that is true - as I already mentioned above too. And you are correct - "obviously" I am not being forced to upgrade - thank you for reminding everyone of that. And which, BTW, illustrates my point - so thank you again.

But have you read through this thread to hear what others are implying? Others are suggesting or implying they are either (1) being forced to upgrade to W11 OR (2) they are being forced to upgrade their hardware to support W11. Now if (2) is the claim, then I ask, who is FORCING them to buy new hardware? Contrary to their claims, it is NOT Microsoft!

If Microsoft is not forcing you (collectively) to buy W11, how can they be forcing anyone to buy new hardware? Even newer, factory made computers capable of supporting W11 that come with W10 preinstalled, can be - not "must" be - can be upgraded to W11 typically for free. So again, who is being forced?

I note I have 5 computers here, 2 are running W11. My laptop I upgraded to W11 for free, because I wanted to. Nobody forced me. The other was built with more current hardware and W11 in mind. EVERY purchase was by choice. Nobody forced me.

It's weasel wording, not a blatant lie.

If by "weasel wording" you mean "marketing weenie hype" then I agree - to a point. I say "to a point" only because multiple independent organizations have verified Microsoft, along with dozens of other IT, manufacturing, retail, government, hospitality/restaurant, travel, automotive, and agriculture companies have all...

...committed to reducing their carbon footprints and setting examples for others in their industries.

Are the naysayers in this thread really suggesting TechRadar, Paul Thurrott, Microsoft, Apple, San Francisco, Berlin, Vancouver, Disney, Hilton Hotels, Walmart, Samsung, Forbes and others are all conspiring to fabricate this story about committing to reducing their carbon footprints? Really?

That said, no doubt "hype" is very much applicable here too. I would be surprised if any of those companies are anywhere near "carbon-neutral" as some of the marketing "hype" would like us to believe. But still, several of those companies, including Microsoft, have committed to reduce their carbon footprint by 75% by 2030. Even if that figure is inflated (hyped-up) by 200%, reducing their carbon-footprint (which DOES, by the way, include their "cloud" divisions) by 37.5% in the next 6 years is a significant achievement, even with a long ways to go.

 

[remixedcat]

You are forced to upgrade to w11 when the software you use is no longer supported on w10... ugh...

 

[Bill_Bright]

You are forced to upgrade to w11 when the software you use is no longer supported on w10... ugh...

Huh? Come on! Just a little common sense here, okay? If the software developer refuses to maintain support with their product, that's on them. Did that software suddenly stop working? No! So come on! You are just making up unrealistic scenarios.

But let's assume you are correct and there is some software developer somewhere that decides they are no longer supporting W10, and "IF" you want to continue to use that software, you must migrate to W11. It is that 3rd party software developer that is forcing you to upgrade, not Microsoft.

 

[BSim500]

If Microsoft is not forcing you (collectively) to buy W11, how can they be forcing anyone to buy new hardware? Even newer, factory made computers capable of supporting W11 that come with W10 preinstalled, can be - not "must" be - can be upgraded to W11 typically for free. So again, who is being forced?

But let's assume you are correct and there is some software developer somewhere that decides they are no longer supporting W10, and "IF" you want to continue to use that software, you must migrate to W11. It is that 3rd party software developer that is forcing you to upgrade, not Microsoft.

At this stage I'm convinced there's some strange language barrier going on here with your posts that half the forum (myself included) can't quite figure out. Reality = Microsoft will pull the plug on mainstream W10 support next year (Oct 14th 2025 to be exact). So yeah, it kinda is Microsoft that's forcing you to upgrade, as they say in their own words on their own website...

 

[Bill_Bright]

So yeah, it kinda is Microsoft that's forcing you to upgrade...

LOL

There is no language barrier. I understand exactly what people are saying. I just don't understand why they refuse to accept reality. Energy consumption is not the same as efficiency. Microsoft has not forced anyone to buy new hardware. Everyone has the option to chose not to. Microsoft has not forced anyone to upgrade to W11. They can stick with W10 or move to an alternative OS.

Sure, Microsoft strongly encourages us to upgrade. That only makes sense. It takes a HUGE amount of resources to maintain support for two operating systems, especially when one is a superseded, "legacy" OS and there is $0.00 returns on those investments.

Another reality many seem to be ignoring (why, I don't know) is that AMD, Intel, NVIDIA, ASUS, Gigabyte, HP etc. are not sitting on their thumbs and legacy technologies either. Nor are the bad guys! Sure, Microsoft is "a" driving force in computer technologies but they definitely are not the only one. Change is inevitable. Its a fact of life. Its why 8-tracks, cassettes, reel-to-reel, CDs, CRTs, Palm Pilots, Blackberrys, 386s, DDR2, 4:3 monitors and much much more were all retired BEFORE they died.

"Kinda"?

How is Microsoft forcing you? Will your computer suddenly stop working in Oct 2025? Windows 7 end of life happened in January 2020 yet there are still millions of people using it. How is that possible if what you said is true? Heck, there are still people using XP!

Here's a thought. STOP USING MICROSOFT PRODUCTS if you hate them so much. Unless you work for Microsoft, they are not forcing you to use Windows.

And what does that have to do with Microsoft promising to reduce their carbon footprint? Oh that's right. That another reality (even if hyped up a bit) some here don't just refuse to accept, they have declared, while providing zero supporting evidence, to be a lie! Nothing lost in translation there.

 

[remixedcat]

Huh? Come on! Just a little common sense here, okay? If the software developer refuses to maintain support with their product, that's on them. Did that software suddenly stop working? No! So come on! You are just making up unrealistic scenarios.

But let's assume you are correct and there is some software developer somewhere that decides they are no longer supporting W10, and "IF" you want to continue to use that software, you must migrate to W11. It is that 3rd party software developer that is forcing you to upgrade, not Microsoft.

I'm done arguing with a brick wall

 

[Bill_Bright]

I'm done arguing with a brick wall

Oh now that was original.

Then PLEASE! Show us where and how Microsoft forced you to upgrade your hardware? Show us where Microsoft left you with no options and forced you to upgrade to W11?

Show us where the software developer of the program you were referring to above, had no choice but to end support for W10, and that action forced you to upgrade to W11.

I will definitely stand firm and be a barrier to nonsense and falsehoods. But show us substantiating evidence of your claims of such forcing and I will gladly step aside - with apologies.

 

[BSim500]

There is no language barrier. I understand exactly what people are saying. I just don't understand why they refuse to accept reality. Energy consumption is not the same as efficiency. Microsoft has not forced anyone to buy new hardware. Everyone has the option to chose not to. Microsoft has not forced anyone to upgrade to W11. They can stick with W10 or move to an alternative OS.

How is Microsoft forcing you? Will your computer suddenly stop working in Oct 2025? Windows 7 end of life happened in January 2020 yet there are still millions of people using it. How is that possible if what you said is true? Heck, there are still people using XP!

It's a good idea to upgrade from unsupported OS's. Eg, if you don't, you can end up leaking pages from your personal diary.

 

[64K]

Here's a thought. STOP USING MICROSOFT PRODUCTS if you hate them so much. Unless you work for Microsoft, they are not forcing you to use Windows.

Bill, it's just not that simple. Hundreds of millions of people are being forced to use Windows because Windows and MS Office utterly dominate the business world. If you keep work related stuff at home then you use MS products at home too and not always paid for by the company you work for. A person without Windows experience is almost unemployable except for min wage jobs and no experience with MS Office at all is a bad sign.

 

[Onasi]

I find the whole dogpiling on Bill here to be fairly unjust. He is technically correct in that there is nothing forcing one to upgrade. The necessity is formed through the fact that Windows is essentially a monopoly on desktop PCs. Which, yes, is not ideal. But! It’s the same as every other Windows cycle, we see the same things. The support is slowly dropped for older version, software moves on, hardware gets (at least officially) locked out. 10 has been out for a decade now. It’s been a while. This is business as usual.
Now yes, one can absolutely think that 11 is flawed. One can blame MS for technically going against the initial principle of 10 (it was supposed to be the last release and was to go on rolling forever). It’s annoying, sure. But I am not sure what the alternative would be. I mean, yeah, 10 staying around forever as planned would be, sure, but that’s not the reality we are facing. So… what? There are only three sane options - update, stay on 10 as long as even the payed optional updates last and then update or move to another OS. So, Mac or Linux then. There is no other option. Screaming into the void about it will not, unfortunately, change this reality.

 

[Bill_Bright]

It's a good idea to upgrade from unsupported OS's.

Oh I sure would not argue with that. If you look through this site, you will see where I regularly tell users to stay current. You will also see where I tell folks to NOT connect an XP machine, for example, to a network that has Internet access, not just for their own security, but to avoid being a threat to the rest of us!

Bill, it's just not that simple. Hundreds of millions of people are being forced to use Windows because Windows and MS Office utterly dominate the business world.

I totally understand that. And I even agree. But that's by circumstance. Microsoft still is not forcing you to upgrade to W11, nor are they forcing you to spend your own money to upgrade your hardware. Your company or even your school might because they made that choice. But that is not Microsoft.

There are still alternatives. Open or Libra Office (yes, there are exceptions, but they are few) allows users to create fully compatible Word and Excel documents - even with Linux.

And for sure, unless that is how you put a roof over your head, NO ONE needs a gaming rig with a $1000 graphics card that requires W11.

I find the whole dogpiling on Bill here to be fairly unjust. He is technically correct in that there is nothing forcing one to upgrade.

Thanks Onasi.

Now yes, one can absolutely think that 11 is flawed.

Agreed. But it has been the same with every new version release. Some to lessor, some to much greater degrees (W8 comes to mind).

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Again, with MS webifying their stuff, you can pretty much run the entire Office suite from a browser, if a bit more basic. I'm able to login to my work account in a browser on Linux, and I can do a fair amount of my job that way. Certainly not all of it, but some of that is limited by security of remote connections. Outlook looks just like my office desktop's Outlook, Teams looks and acts just like Teams. Excel is a bit more basic, but still it would be entirely possible to do a fair amount of my work in that basic format. Which takes me back to my old point, WaaS is not all that inconceivable for many who aren't power users of MS software. That means MS doesn't care if your old PC can't update as long as your browser is in compliance. If you buy a new PC, you're going to have future Windows support.

 

[Onasi]

Agreed. But it has been the same with every new version release. Some to lessor, some to much greater degrees (W8 comes to mind).

I think that, on my memory, the only times that wasn’t a thing was with XP (mostly because it followed the disastrous Millennium and 2000 wasn’t technically a consumer OS) and 7 (there were XP holdouts, but overall the reception was positive). The venerable 10 that everyone is currently clinging to had a lot of pushback on release.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I think that, on my memory, the only times that wasn’t a thing was with XP

It is very subjective - depending on individual's familiarity with the old version, and their personal preferences.

I think W7 was the most accepted. I know many, including me, who didn't bother with Vista, held on to XP, then readily jumped to W7. And sure, there was a learning curve with W7, but once used to it (which didn't take long), XP seemed awkward.

I note the widespread use of Start10 and now Start11, as well as Classic Shell/Open Shell is because folks liked the W7 UI, start menu and desktop so much.

Still there were many who trashed W7 any chance they could. And those who take the opportunity to trash Windows and Microsoft, even when totally OT, every chance they get too.

 

[Coogar]

Huh? Come on! Just a little common sense here, okay? If the software developer refuses to maintain support with their product, that's on them. Did that software suddenly stop working? No! So come on! You are just making up unrealistic scenarios.

But let's assume you are correct and there is some software developer somewhere that decides they are no longer supporting W10, and "IF" you want to continue to use that software, you must migrate to W11. It is that 3rd party software developer that is forcing you to upgrade, not Microsoft.

Apologies to just barge in, but, Bill_Bright, you are incorrect.

I ran Windows Vista for many years (admittedly not since 2007, when Vista had enormous problems, so the entire world claimed), with Vista being my favourite Windows version (ever).

Why am I not running Windows Vista anymore in the year 2024?

Because Steam was no longer supported.
Because Firefox was no longer supported.

So, I was forced to get Windows 10.

In a few years(?) Steam will no longer be supported in Windows 10, which means I will be forced to get that (abominable) Windows 11.

My ancient (gaming) computer - with an i5-2500K, 2x4 GB DDR3-RAM and a RadeonHD 6870 (the latter being replaced by an RX 6500XT) - will some day soon(?) give in...
Therefore, I have already assembled (yet another) new computer which will replace my old, trusted, faithful (gaming) computer lovingly nicknamed "Cougar" (as in: Intel Cougar Point). And that computer is running Windows 11.

Yes, I COULD still be using Vista - an insecure(?) OS with insecure(?) web browsers. Would you advise that?

Why, Bill_Bright, do you keep claiming that no one is forced to "upgrade" to Windows 11 (which WILL mean discarding perfectly good computers for most regular people who are unable to install Linux)?

(And as for discarding perfectly functioning computers that Microsoft refuses to let run Windows 11 - I have a prehistoric HP "SFF" machine with a Pentium 4 "630" (3 GHz, 1c/2t), and that machine is running Linux Mint, fully upgraded, just fine (albeit it just an itsy bitsy teenie weenie bit slow by todays standards).

I've commented a few times here and there about this, but this is the first time *I've* seen a blatant statement like this (not saying there haven't been other, earlier ones: don't ActuallyMan me):

“We’re going to make Windows cloud native. We’re making a big push for Windows 365,” he says. Get ready to start losing more and more control over what you can do if you're sticking to the M$ environment.

If (an enormous "if", I hope) THIS becomes the way that personal computing will be sometime in the future, then I will no longer own and use personal computers.

There is no way in the ENTIRE UNIVERSE that I will use computers this way. Not Microsoft Windows, not Linux, not macOS, not anything else.

 

[Event Horizon]

The user experience peaked at Win7. They then experimented with a smartphone-oriented interface, demolished their QA, and pumped it full of ads, broken features and what can only be described as spyware in everything but name.

 

[64K]

The user experience peaked at Win7. They then experimented with a smartphone-oriented interface, demolished their QA, and pumped it full of ads, broken features and what can only be described as spyware in everything but name.

I'm expecting MS will have a heck of a battle trying to get people off Win 10 just like they did with Win 7. People are content with Win 10. The last I read around 2/3rd of the users were still on Win 10 even with the upcoming end of extended support Oct next year. MS knows that they need to get people onto Win 11 so that they can begin the process of forcing hundreds of millions of people off Win 11 onto the next Windows for no reason at all.

 

[R-T-B]

I think all of you have trouble with the word "forced."

Bill is correct, none of you are being forced. The word you are looking for is "coerced."

 

[xtreemchaos]

nail on the head id been looking for that word for days but could not see it with my word blindness, now ive forgot what i was going to say .

 

[Bill_Bright]

Apologies to just barge in, but, Bill_Bright, you are incorrect.

I ran Windows Vista for many years (admittedly not since 2007, when Vista had enormous problems, so the entire world claimed), with Vista being my favourite Windows version (ever).

Why am I not running Windows Vista anymore in the year 2024?

Because Steam was no longer supported.
Because Firefox was no longer supported.

So, I was forced to get Windows 10.

No apologies needed, but I do wish you had read through the thread first before you posted that because your scenario was already addressed, and shown to be incorrect.

You are implying that Microsoft is somehow expected and required to maintain support for ALL "legacy" software - forever!!!! That is totally unreasonable and impractical. Windows would take up terabytes of space, if not petabytes. Or are you saying only the software that you use should have remained supported?

Microsoft cannot be expected to do that. That would be 10s of 1000s of different software programs. And then why stop there? Why not expect Microsoft to maintain support for all the hardware ever made - despite the fact it is the hardware makers responsibility to develop hardware drivers?

I say "all" and "forever" because otherwise, who decides what goes in and what stays out? Coogar? Captain Dathon? Microsoft? No, no and no! Back in the day, Windows used to include a HUGE database of compatible hardware. But then USERS complained about Windows taking up a dozen floppy disks and way too much disk space.

So Microsoft wisely and correctly said no more. If a HP, Epson, and Canon want their printers supported by Windows, here's the "industry standard" protocols they must ensure (through maker developed) their drivers must support. If WD and Maxstar want their drives supported, here's the protocols. If NVIDIA and AMD want their cards supported, here's the protocol - protocol all these hardware makers cooperated together to develop, BTW. The same applies to software.

It was the developers of Steam and Firefox who decided they would drop support for the legacy operating system, not Microsoft. You need to be yelling at and blaming Valve and Mozilla, not Microsoft.

So, sorry, but it is you who are incorrect.

Why, Bill_Bright, do you keep claiming that no one is forced to "upgrade" to Windows 11

What I said several times, and what my point was and is, is that Microsoft did not force anyone to upgrade to W11. Those users did so by choice.

MS knows that they need to get people onto Win 11 so that they can begin the process of forcing hundreds of millions of people off Win 11 onto the next Windows for no reason at all.

"For no reason at all"??? See? This is the exact misrepresentation, intentional rumor mongering, and narrow mindedness that gets me riled up.

Did you know, 64K, that Window is but a small portion of Microsoft's revenues? No I am sure you didn't because for sure, you didn't bother to verify your facts before posting.

Windows is but 12% of Microsoft's revenues, well behind Office products and services (23%), and Azure Cloud Services (22% of total).

Bill is correct, none of you are being forced. The word you are looking for is "coerced."

Thanks for agreeing about being forced. But coerced? Nah! Not unless you are willing to admit you are so gullible you were tricked or forced into upgrading. I sure wasn't. Were you that naive? I bet not.

"Strongly encouraged" with marketing hype and hard to find opt-out options? Sure. I'll buy that.

 

[fec32a4de]

I'm expecting MS will have a heck of a battle trying to get people off Win 10 just like they did with Win 7. People are content with Win 10. The last I read around 2/3rd of the users were still on Win 10 even with the upcoming end of extended support Oct next year. MS knows that they need to get people onto Win 11 so that they can begin the process of forcing hundreds of millions of people off Win 11 onto the next Windows for no reason at all.

Its gonna be one hell of an experience to try and get people off of 10. 11 just interesting to a lot of people, a lot don't want AI shoved in their face, a lot don't like the user interface/experience changes.

Hell 11 isn't doing great: https://www.pcgamer.com/software/wi...ade-and-its-market-share-is-actually-falling/

I dont understand Microsoft strategy in regards to Windows, why do users have to fight their OS, customize the living hell out of it just to get work done and play games.

 

[64K]

Did you know, 64K, that Window is but a small portion of Microsoft's revenues? No I am sure you didn't because for sure, you didn't bother to verify your facts before posting.

Windows is but 12% of Microsoft's revenues, well behind Office products and services (23%), and Azure Cloud Services (22% of total).

I obviously wasn't referring to their revenue but to the percentage of people still on Win 10 and happy with it. This is a tech enthusiast site so your perspective is different than the average Windows user but really they don't see why the hassle of constantly changing OS over and over. What it looks like to them is that MS moves things around for no reason, makes the OS more difficult to use and increases MS ability to data mine it's customers.