Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
1–10 of 514 posts
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#2I am a IT solutions provider for the public and small business. I think the changes to Windows 11 is gearing up to work with organizations to create a surveillance state.
So I have to decided to promote Linux over Windows for computers I build for customers. If you have any suggestions on how I can make this promotion, better let me know.
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#3I think describing TPM and Secure Boot as "artificial limitations" is unfair. Many Linux distros have no problem working with both of these and they serve a valuable purpose.
The problem is not that they exist or that Windows 11 supports them. It's that Microsoft pretends they are required, when they are not.
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#4I am a IT solutions provider for the public and small business. I think the changes to Windows 11 is gearing up to work with organizations to create a surveillance state. So I have to decided to promote Linux over Windows for computers I build for customers. If you have any suggestions on how I can make this promotion, better let me know.
How could they create something that already exists?
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#5I think describing TPM and Secure Boot as "artificial limitations" is unfair. Many Linux distros have no problem working with both of these and they serve a valuable purpose. The problem is not that they exist or that Windows 11 supports them. It's that Microsoft pretends they are required , when they are not.
> It's that Microsoft pretends they are required
I think that's what "artificial limitations" mean. Microsoft pretending they are required when they are not.
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#6I switched my at home setup to MX Linux just in the last 2 months for dissatisfaction with even Win10.
Win11 is a hard no, I’m keeping a laptop with Win10 for the small amount of games I play. I will likely even try WINE for them soon but just haven’t got around to it.
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#7I switched my at home setup to MX Linux just in the last 2 months for dissatisfaction with even Win10. Win11 is a hard no, I’m keeping a laptop with Win10 for the small amount of games I play. I will likely even try WINE for them soon but just haven’t got around to it.
Try proton from valve. Every game that's not bound by kernel level anticheat pretty much works. ProtonDB is the place to get the required magic incantations for edge cases.
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#8I think describing TPM and Secure Boot as "artificial limitations" is unfair. Many Linux distros have no problem working with both of these and they serve a valuable purpose. The problem is not that they exist or that Windows 11 supports them. It's that Microsoft pretends they are required , when they are not.
I hear you, but I don't really think its needed. IMHO, those features are being used to take away control of hardware you bought and paid for.
If you want to add better security to a computer make it opt-in and not expect people to use it who don't need it.
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#9I think it's a good plan, though there might be some pain.
I have a bog standard AMD graphics card that does not work in Linux. I've tried multiple distributions and version in those distributions and both the Linux and AMD drivers. It just randomly flashes. Where do I go to get help? Who knows?
Re: Retiring Windows 10 and Microsoft's move towards a surveillance state
#10I think describing TPM and Secure Boot as "artificial limitations" is unfair. Many Linux distros have no problem working with both of these and they serve a valuable purpose. The problem is not that they exist or that Windows 11 supports them. It's that Microsoft pretends they are required , when they are not.
I don't use Windows and actually find it kind of insane when I use someone else's computer to see what Windows is like...
But it's kind of MSFT's choice whether TPM and secure boot are requirements for their software. If their software makes security assumptions that the OS has access to trusted hardware then it's a requirement. One could argue that they should create secure and less secure versions of Windows, but I don't think anyone is really going to take that seriously beyond rhetoric.
There are a lot of advantages to assuming the hardware is mildly trustworthy. The downside is you may not want Microsoft to be controlling what counts as trusted on your machine. If so, then you probably don't want MSFT to have root in your machine either and you're better off with a different OS.