587
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
587 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
57226 readers
4505 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
“this is why i switched to linux” no shut up lol. this is not an issue for any average user and if you had the ability to hack the TPM requirements you have the ability to fix your borked install. this issue affects no one else. 🙂🙂🙂
No, the issue is that Microsoft officially supports only two versions of Windows. And support of the older one is ending next year. They are forcing users that are using perfectly capable hardware to artificially switch to - for many - needless new hardware.
Yes, this is bad, and should be called out as such.
However, tweaking the software to run against the intent of Microsoft is still just asking for pain. Versus voting with your feet, so to speak, and saying "fine, Microsoft, if that's how you want to play it, then I'm going elsewhere". Of course the number of people doing that will be negligible so as not to make a difference, but it's better than forcing Windows 11 to run against Microsoft's intent. That's just asking for a fight that you won't win.
There is a service called 0patch that offers microcode patching for EoL windows versions, for about 30 bucks a year I'm still getting updates for my Win7 gaming rig. Never had an exploit or hijacking and I pirate quite a bit on that PC.
Plan on getting one for my Win10 daily driver next year.
And as for trust: Microsoft has awarded 0patch for several zero day exploits, and have used their patches in official releases before so not only are they trustworthy, they are literally faster at finding exploits than MS themselves.
Full disclosure: No relationship with the company other than as a happy paying customer.
In order for this update to have any effect on you you would have had to have failed to upgrade your computer for basically 20 years in a row. I don't think it's unreasonable that support for older processors is dropped
edit: pls see jj4211s comment for an actual rebuttal. the below is just me being curious and probably ill-informed. i do appreciate your help if you are feeling helpful tho.
please identify the material changes that come with an end of support that force users to artificially switch.
in general i am entirely on the position against ms, but i genuinely do not see any concrete evidence of a “force”; ms’s own lifecycle policy even notes that products will continue to get “security and non-security updates.”
again i am anti-corporate, but i’d very much like to be accurate in my criticism, so any insight into the forces at play are appreciated 🙂
I agree with you, but did you read the article? This is about a specific CPU instruction, not TPMs.
First generation Core i# line, the Core name itself goes back 2 gens before that.
Makes sense, I didn’t write that, it’s a direct quote from the article
yeah i did read the article. to clarify for anyone confused, folks are already bypassing the TPM requirement to get these windows installs working in the first place. the POPCNT instruction issue is only affecting installs that are already using this workaround to force W11 to run on a device it doesn’t want to work on.
Ah I see what you mean. No install would be possible without a TPM but hacked installs allow it, however now the update is explicitly using a CPU instruction that only works with CPUs that support TPM. Makes sense, thanks for clarifying
Gen-1 through Gen-7 CPUs also still work despite lack of TPM. If it was about trying to force the TPM thing, even just using AXV2 instruction requirement would have limited it to only Gen4-7 running without TPM. I'm sure there's other ways they could try to limit installs with the TPM-check disabled.
"Hack" the TPM. Ha!
This is why I switched to Linux.
You lot think that the solution to everything is Linux except you have absolutely no understanding of corporate IT. It's hilarious. No wait, it's annoying.