I've often wondered if Mark Zuckerberg has anyone in his inner corporate circle that is willing to say "no" to him.
Meta seems like there was a wall of post-it notes in Zuck's office with a bunch of ideas to stop FB from becoming MySpace and the dart he threw landed on this one.
My gut tells me that Meta is dead in the water but with the billions that FB have in their war chest I wouldn't bet against it completely, however, the fact it requires a headset, a massive source of friction, will restrict the audience.
I dunno... seems like Zuck is living in a fantasy world here.
Huh, that's a neat idea. What if Zuck is this generation's George Lucas?
For context, after the success of Star Wars and Indiana Jones, it's said that Lucas surrounded himself with yes-men who agreed with whatever he said. Anyone who wasn't one of those didn't last long in his inner circle.
The end result was "Star Wars: Episode 1 - The Phantom Menace". There's an hour-long review video by "Mr Plinkett"[0] that dives into the all the major issues of the film, along with some honestly-not-great humour (imho) but at the end it really explains what the problem was: Lucas had absolute control, and everyone did what he said. And if the original Star Wars had been that way it would have been a disaster.
There is also an official documentary about the making of episode 1 that is viewable on YouTube.[0] Even though this was produced as promotional material for the film's DVD release, Lucas' total control and hubristic self regard are barely concealed subtexts. There is a great scene where Spielberg is visiting Lucas on set and they are just repeating to each other "It'll be great!" or some such platitude with forced enthusiasm. Even Lucas seemed to know he was out of his depth.
> Most proeminent features for Windows 11 are an updated scheduler tailored to big.little architectures like the new Alder Lake from Intel and Direct Storage for games, a rebranding of the same feature from Xbox One and PS5.
Let's be honest here though: those could easily have been added to Windows 10 as they will be on the same kernel... they added them to Windows 11 so that people would buy the new shiny!
I'm not saying it's wrong, companies need to get new money in to keep going, but those features hardly merited a "new" OS :)
Makes no sense there is nothing to buy. Win11 is a free "update". Not adding it as update to win10 but give it a new name I purely marketing. Stuff like that happens if new people are in charge and want to have a new thing "made by them". It does not cost the users anything.
It does: Try creating a a local account on the Home version! You can't. You must create a Microsoft account which ties you Microsoft. You may not be physically handing over $ but you are using their ecosystem. Your actions are now recorded, categorized, analysed and then M$ make more money from them.
There is no way in hell they will give you an OS for $0 unless there is a way to make money from you. None.
Look, I'm not being cynical or negative about it! I'm just putting it in perspective. If people wanna do it then go for it. It's not for me.
This isn't just a Microsoft thing, companies that give you something for nothing are making money from you somehow! Or else they won't be around long.
Just consider the cheapest version of windows 7 home was like $150 bucks USD in 2008.
They aren’t apple. And Microsoft has randomly shut down hotmail/outlook accounts of mine for using a different IP (ie: proxying through a linode when on public wifi) and then made it so recovery wasn’t possible. It locked me out of an Xbox account
Years later I was able to recover it, but I will not rely on any of their services for anything I deem important. Ever again.
Still cost you nothing at all since you can stay on win10 home for as long as you want or basically for as long as your hardware does work for you. If you buy new hardware with windows 11 on it you pay for it but that would be exactly the same if the new hardware would come with win10. And it perfectly reasonable since the license is for the hardware and new hardware needs a new license.
There is still no additional cost anywhere as upgrade is entirely free AND optional.
Beside that Windows 10 Home "requires" an account too since the May 2019 update but it can be bypassed and so can the account "requirement" to install windows 11 home, its all just one search away for the people who care. Most dont but that's another topic.
> Makes no sense there is nothing to buy. Win11 is a free "update". Not adding it as update to win10 but give it a new name I purely marketing. Stuff like that happens if new people are in charge and want to have a new thing "made by them". It does not cost the users anything.
Except for the bit that's the entire point of this tool: they dropped support for a ton of systems.
For a lot of people, to "upgrade" to Windows 11 means "buy a whole new PC." This drives additional sales of Windows 11 PCs (of which MS will take a cut).
The tool is useless you dont need it at all. Someone even wrote an GitHub issue about that but the owner deleted it.
MS has detailed steps on the official website how you can install or update on unsupported hardware. They dont prevent anyone from running windows 11. They simply wont provide support if you run it on older hardware. Beside that they didn not drop support for "tons of systems" quiet the opposite they committed to provide updates to windows 10 for almost 5 years (likely to be extended). By then hardware not officially supported by windows 11 will be at least 7 years old.
>For a lot of people, to "upgrade" to Windows 11 means "buy a whole new PC." This drives additional sales of Windows 11 PCs (of which MS will take a cut).
How so? You dont need to upgrade nor buy a new hardware. If you want to that's entirely on you and has nothing to do with windows 11. The only reason to buy new hardware is if the old does not work for your use-case anymore or if support runs out in 5 years but chances are you replaced the hardware due to age long before that.
>Let's be honest here though: those could easily have been added to Windows 10 as they will be on the same kernel... they added them to Windows 11 so that people would buy the new shiny!
Well yes of course, obviously, but I was not trying to defend Microsoft's choice here, just pointing out the feature difference between them as great-grandparent was being vocally critical without doing any prior research beforehand or he was just being intentionally snarky to score karma points from the Microsoft/Windows 11 hate mob.
> They likely want laptops being sold running Win11 to have sane security capabilities for corporate use out of the box
Corporate security has been fine for years: TPM 1.2 (if I remember the versions correctly) alongside bitlocker and sensible corporate policies render computers all but impervious to everything. However, this implies a competent IT division in your company... I've worked in plenty without them!
Social engineering or clicking a dodgy link/download is probably a bigger threat than someone hacking your computer and that can be mitigated to a huge extent by restricting access to only the things that the user needs, locking down apps, running with low privileges, auditing relevant things etc... again, competent IT division needed for this too.
Now, if your threat matrix includes nation-states then one could argue that any device is hackable.
My take is that hardware vendors saw the writing on the wall with the pandemic-buying about to ease-up and worked with Microsoft (or pressured them...) to help out. We're already seeing Chromebooks on the wane[0].
From my perspective (long-time Windows guy now on Fedora) I see nothing of value in Windows 11 that 10 didn't have already.
Encryption keys never leave your device, they are derivated from your password. When you use Touch/Face ID, your encryption key is stored in the Secure Enclave. In general, we use the same method/model as FileVault2.
That article you linked (like literally every other one I've read) makes no mention of the numbers that recovered just fine. If they all made a recovery then this vaccine push is pointless.
As an anecdote, in 2013 I "measured" inflation as it affected me. By this I mean the things I buy like petrol, food, utilities, insurance etc. I looked at bank statements from 2011 and 2012 and compared them to the 2013 bank statements.
It wasn't 100% accurate as a couple of things changed but it was definitely close enough to be applicable.
In 2013 I was paying out 13% more for roughly the same stuff yet the official government figure was was less than 3% per annum.
So my own inflation in that two year period was twice what the government said it should be.
In short, it doesn't surprise me that they're talking shit about inflation! High inflation won't win you an election.
I haven't checked 2021 vs 2019/2020 yet but I will in January 2022... although, I may not want to :(
I don't see it like that. If they did become the town square, it's one where people must only say certain things that are part of the official narrative [0] or where people post things to an authoritative figure who reads out the stuff that he's approved using rules that he won't disclose.
Meta seems like there was a wall of post-it notes in Zuck's office with a bunch of ideas to stop FB from becoming MySpace and the dart he threw landed on this one.
My gut tells me that Meta is dead in the water but with the billions that FB have in their war chest I wouldn't bet against it completely, however, the fact it requires a headset, a massive source of friction, will restrict the audience.
I dunno... seems like Zuck is living in a fantasy world here.