• easily3667@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    The technical requirements for 11 were reasonable when it came out and even more so today. Laptops being ewaste when they were built that way isn’t Microsoft’s fault.

      • easily3667@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        What is unreasonable about 4 gb of ram, a processor made in the last decade, and a tpm chip? Even Linux doesn’t run well under 8, let alone 4, because linux’s memory management and handling of low memory is a catastrophic embarrassment. (Yes it uses less idle, but you get to 80% and the system will lock up)

        • nyan@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Whether or not an older machine “runs well” is highly dependent on what you’re using it for. I only very recently (like, after the new year) retired a 16-year-old laptop with 2GB RAM that was running Gentoo, when I got a good deal on something that would compile gcc in a reasonable amount of time rather than needing to be left to run overnight. However, most people don’t need to compile large software on a regular basis, and the old machine was still doing okay in its role as a large-screen-coarse-resolution pseudo-video-iPod, ssh client, quick lookup device for Perl manpages, emergency Internet query device, and general backup/light-use system. Worthless for gaming and somewhat sluggish on the Web, naturally, but that wasn’t what I needed it for.

          I’d expect anything with 4GB RAM and 4 CPU threads to produce somewhat acceptable performace on most individual webpages (multiple Javascript-heavy sites might be a challenge, though, so stick to 1-2 tabs at a time), which would make the main issue most people would have with my old laptop disappear.

        • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Linux runs just fine in 4. Or much less. It depends a lot on what you use it for. My 486 had a whooping 32 Megs of memory and ran Linux just fine.

          Regarding MS, the main problem is the changing of the goalpost. And I’m not so sure there’s even any point to the whole TPM thing anyway.

          • easily3667@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Well if we’re going to just talk about the kernel with 1-2 embedded apps, sure.

            or if you’re going back to 1990 yes, applications back then we’re less demanding than chrome. However that was 35 years ago.

            But this article isn’t about your little nxp chip or the much weaker 486 chip, it’s about laptops humans are using with like…modern web browsers. Which will happily eat 10 gb of ram if you let them. And then Linux will shit the bed and lock up the moment you’re out of swap or zram.

            I have no idea what you mean by moving goalposts.

            The TPM attitude is common among Linux fanboys and I don’t really get it. It’s a chip for making security simpler for the average user. If you’re worried about laptops getting trashed because users won’t install Linux, the tpm chip is for them. Also it’s over a decade old.

          • easily3667@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            TPM chip is a decade old, built into all but shit laptops, and is a net positive for overall system security.

            Id argue it’s more than not required under Linux, it’s barely supported under Linux and is a giant pain to get working.

            • Norah (pup/it/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              24 hours ago

              See that’s where you’re wrong though, because my computer does have a TPM chip and still can’t run Win11. That’s because Microsoft locked them down to v2.0 or newer ones and mine’s only a v1.2 chip.

              • easily3667@lemmus.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 hours ago

                Well that’s an actually new thing to say. Considering this Linux fanboy hissy fit over a software they hate has been going on what 3 years now, I’m honestly impressed.

                Looks like it’s still about a decade old but… neat