"Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6600U CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.80 GHz"

Apparently this won't run W11.
[See below for system details in sig.]

Recently bought second hand and barely out of support from Dell.
This is by far my most modern PC (partner has same model but with i5 and
no Thunderbolt).

I won't be buying a new laptop just to run W11.
Noting that some of my PCs are still W7, others W8.1, others W10.

Is this a deliberate attempt to split the user base between corporate
(with PC replacement programmes) and home (who must by now mostly have PCs
more than adequate for their needs)?

I am tied to Windows by several electronic items which don't have Linux
support, but after being a Linux user for years I haven't seen the need
for the last few years.

Cheers

Dave R

--
Dell Latitude 7280 with Full HD and Thunderbolt (woo hoo)

On 28/06/2021 11:23, David wrote:
> "Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6600U CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.80 GHz"
>
> Apparently this won't run W11.
> [See below for system details in sig.]
>
> Recently bought second hand and barely out of support from Dell.
> This is by far my most modern PC (partner has same model but with i5 and
> no Thunderbolt).
>
> I won't be buying a new laptop just to run W11.
> Noting that some of my PCs are still W7, others W8.1, others W10.
>
> Is this a deliberate attempt to split the user base between corporate
> (with PC replacement programmes) and home (who must by now mostly have PCs
> more than adequate for their needs)?
>
> I am tied to Windows by several electronic items which don't have Linux
> support, but after being a Linux user for years I haven't seen the need
> for the last few years.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> Dave R
>
>

They are not going to supply 32 bit versions either, which means
my 2011 AMD Phenon x6 with 4G and Win10 32/pro is end-of-life
(or will be in 5 years-ish time).

In article <ijtm8bFq7v8U1@mid.individual.net>, wibble@btinternet.com says...
>
> "Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6600U CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.80 GHz"
>
> Apparently this won't run W11.
> [See below for system details in sig.]
>
> Recently bought second hand and barely out of support from Dell.
> This is by far my most modern PC (partner has same model but with i5 and
> no Thunderbolt).
>
> I won't be buying a new laptop just to run W11.
> Noting that some of my PCs are still W7, others W8.1, others W10.
>
> Is this a deliberate attempt to split the user base between corporate
> (with PC replacement programmes) and home (who must by now mostly have PCs
> more than adequate for their needs)?
>
> I am tied to Windows by several electronic items which don't have Linux
> support, but after being a Linux user for years I haven't seen the need
> for the last few years.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> Dave R

My Dell Vostro 470 is nine years old, I realise, and my XPS 1640 is 11 years
old. (Where did that go?). I found a couple of years ago that my latest
version of Corel Painter turned up its nose at the laptop's graphics card,
which was disappointing. But that's the only performance problem I've
encounted with either of them. Both start in a trice, and are sprightly in
operation. I really, really don't need anything faster - and I spend hours a
day on one or the other (mainly the desktop - the laptop's had surprisingly
little use as it happens).

So not being able to run W11 is a disappointment, though the only thing I've
seen that I recognise I'd like is to be able to personalise virtual desktops
differently to distinguish them - truly a minor tweak. It might turn out to be
useful to run Android apps on Windows as well - as it is I sometimes connect my
mobile via Samsung Flow as a sort of "remote desktop" so I can type properly.
I can live without Windows 11.

But what's harder to live with is the *imposed* need to scrap perfectly good
hardware in four years' time. Sure, it's long in the tooth, but both machines
run W10 pretty much perfectly, and I'd got used to the idea that hardware
requirements had pretty much plateaued - at least for my needs. There is no
reason that these machines couldn't plod on for many more years, until
something that can't be repaired finally breaks.

Now I have just four years left before they have to be scrapped, or repurposed
to avoid the risks of internet connection after security fixes cease. I've
hated to see even older hardware have to be scrapped when W10 turned out to be
just too demanding for them - in four years time these perfectly adequate
machines will be buying time before they end up in some third-world dump
(taking a cynical view of "recycling" processes). And across the world, tens -
hundreds - of millions of adequate hardware will be scrapped, or left to run on
unprotected from the ingeneuity of hackers. I'm not sure which is worse.

I've no real motivation to change culture to Linux, or ChromeOS - I actually
think W10 is pretty good, at least for my needs. But maybe this will prompt a
rebellion, and maybe that 2025 is going to be the start of a whole new Linux
movement. Otherwise, the waste of resources will be truly criminal.

--

Phil, London

David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6600U CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.80 GHz"

That's not exactly 'latest', it's 5 years old.

> Apparently this won't run W11.
> [See below for system details in sig.]

Do you know why it won't run W11? Did you try the checker?

> Is this a deliberate attempt to split the user base between corporate
> (with PC replacement programmes) and home (who must by now mostly have PCs
> more than adequate for their needs)?

I would wait and see. Quite often when support thresholds are announced,
they either mean 'we won't support this, you're on your own' (but work
fine), or it won't work, but someone will come up with a patch to make them
work with some loss of features.

For example on MacOS the oldest supported machines are ~2013 but somebody has
come up with a patch to take it back to 2008, with some loss of
functionality (no graphics acceleration mostly).

Obviously running such hacks may not be something a business would want to
do, but might be acceptable for a home user.

Theo

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> I would wait and see. Quite often when support thresholds are announced,
> they either mean 'we won't support this, you're on your own' (but work
> fine), or it won't work, but someone will come up with a patch to make them
> work with some loss of features.

Some posts from MS suggest they're refining the supported platforms over
time:

"Using the principles above, we are confident that devices running on Intel
8th generation processors and AMD Zen 2 as well as Qualcomm 7 and 8 Series
will meet our principles around security and reliability and minimum system
requirements for Windows 11. As we release to Windows Insiders and partner
with our OEMs, we will test to identify devices running on Intel 7th
generation and AMD Zen 1 that may meet our principles. We’re committed to
sharing updates with you on the results of our testing over time, as well as
sharing additional technical blogs."

https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2021/06/28/update-on-windows-11-minimum-system-requirements/

So basically they don't know and are making things up as they go. I wouldn't
hold to the current list of supported machines (FSVO 'supported') as being
the last word.

Theo

On 28/06/2021 20:29, Philip Herlihy wrote:
And across the world, tens -
> hundreds - of millions of adequate hardware will be scrapped, or left to run on
> unprotected from the ingeneuity of hackers. I'm not sure which is worse.
>

Given that I run mostly Linux, I'm going to be open hands to a lot of
tasty equipment coming my way ...

--
Adrian C