Windows 11 review: An unnecessary replacement for Windows 10

Microsoft did not release anything worthy since Windows 2000. All their features were not needed. I'd easily pay $500/year for Windows 2000, just as it was, with support for modern hardware and other things needed to survive in modern Internet.

Now I'm not talking about internals. I'm sure that kernel was progressing all those years, for example. I'm talking about user-visible stuff.

Windows XP cartoon UI: terrible. Windows 10 UI: terrible. Good old Windows 2000 UI was just better in every way.

Windows shell? It was good in Windows 2000. Start was good. May be fast search would be a worthy feature to add, but that's about it. They redesign it every year, but it's not getting better.

Windows explorer? It was good in Windows 2000. They move buttons around, but that's not needed.

Control panel is 100x better than this settings nightmare UI.

They invent new UI frameworks every few years. That's not needed. WinAPI is good enough.

It won't happen. But they actually built a perfect OS and lost it. Forever, as corporations can't admit their mistakes. They could have improved upon it all this time, instead of trying to replace it.

With Nadella Microsoft is going downhill. Yes, they're doing things that looks interesting. Like integrating VM with Linux. That's cool. But they kind of gave up. Back in the time, they were actually pushing their own agenda. They had their own tech. Now they gave up and adapt old proven tech. Good for customers, but it's path to the end. If someone learned WSL, it's just one step to true Linux, why pay for Windows at all. Ditto about Edge. They built their own browser engine. How cool is that? Very few corporations were able to do so. And they gave up.

Microsoft lost his teethes. May be they just don't care about desktop anymore. Well, I don't care about Microsoft anymore.

If they make desktop search suck a bit less I'll jump at Windows 11.

I'm an editor and proofread texts daily. (In Spanish). The spell check process in Word was always straightforward, without significant delays between each check.

But guess what. Now the humble spell checker has evolved and now it's AI and cloud based. Nothing wrong with those technologies if properly implemented, but now each word that gets flagged makes a web request to try and find a suggestion, most of which are useless.

It's so frustrating. My work was becoming noticeable slower. Since I get paid per word, I need to work fast, so now before spell checking I have to disconnect from the internet. And I paid for Office! I paid for a software that helps me work slower and earn less.

word and excel are slower when compared to the Google workspace counterparts. There's a very noticeable lag when typing. They should be ashamed of themselves.

> I can only imagine a world where Windows 2000 simply kept receiving security and driver updates. sigh

Everyone wants this, funny how Big Corp works. Its supposed to be giving the consumer what he wants. Economists can't comprehend.

> Even text rendering of input seemed to have a bit of a delay

Modern Office has animated text input which has distinctly different feel. Not sure if it is actually slower though.

Win7 was my last version. Then I switched to Linux Mint permanently and never looked back. I'm a developer using open source web tech, and this made my life a million times easier.

Sure, there's some things that require some/lots of tweaking/research and yea I still miss a few "apps" (Total Commander), BUT you gain so much more. When I rarely dual boot onto Win7 now I really cannot understand how I survived using it earlier.

Windows gets worse every time. Linux just gets better and better. No brainer if you ask me.

I get NVIDIA and audio issues on Windows from time to time. It depends on your audio interface's drivers. Likewise, NVIDIA issues depend on what card you're using.

Linux is 'there' for audio for me. Working on post for a feature-length documentary that is receiving theatrical distribution, entirely in Linux. More stable than Windows has been in years in my experiences.

With open source software you have to select the right hardware. If you want things to keep working I would recommend NixOS (if you're comfortable writing code and learning a new language). If things break you'll roll back your entire system (except /home essentially).

I was on manjaro, but my move to NixOS made me stay Linux (still have 2 gpus to GPU passthough to a Windows VM though)

Trying (and failing miserably) to kill Control Panel blows my mind every time. There's not a single thing that Settings improves upon. Even its "touch-friendliness" is a direct result of omitting important features.

8th generation :) I started their "PC health app" today and got told my Core i7 7700HQ is too old.

PC OEM sales people have already started shopping for bigger houses and boats.

During an ongoing chip shortage too.

In enterprise context I'd assume most of the upgrades would happen with regular device replacement cycles.

I remember Vista had some hardware grading system, and this was around the time GHz scaling was plateauing. I think really high end systems started out as like a 3 on a scale of 10...

Did we ever get to 10?

I don't understand how it makes sense to bind the OS or GUI to desktop UI behaviour, but I've been a happy X11 user since 1994 so what do I know?

I believe that they constrain it because they have no respect for their users.

Yup, this is the main reason I won't be upgrading to Windows 11 anytime soon. I've never been a fan of the icons-only taskbar and have enabled text labels since Windows 7.

I upgraded my HTPC to windows 11 but this is the reason I won't update my workstation. Vertical taskbar makes sense on wide screen multi monitor setups. Centered task bar is ridiculous, even worse than left justified bottom screen cause the icons locations depend on what's on the taskbar making the ui unpredictable and kills any muscle memory advantages.

What about Google insisting you sign in on their own browser with 80%+ market share?

Developers have a wide range of alternatives to Microsoft products, so Microsoft must compete on the merits of its products. If I don't like SQL Server, I could choose between Oracle, MySQL, PostgreSQL, and many other RDBMSes. However, non-developers, particularly those using desktop operating systems, have limited alternatives to the Windows ecosystem. Applications that are exclusive to Windows are still a major reason why many people are still using Windows, though thanks to the Web and mobile computing this is less of an issue than it was 15 years ago. There is also still the fact that most retail PCs ship with Windows by default; options for purchasing PCs with Linux are still rather limited, though once again this situation has improved greatly in the past 15 years. Sure, there's the Mac as an alternative to Windows, but Apple does not compete in certain use cases and price points, whereas the Windows/PC ecosystem covers most use cases at a wide variety of price points.

When you're the 800-pound gorilla, you don't have to worry as much about the other animals in the ecosystem. I remember the days of Internet Explorer 6 and how that browser was allowed to stagnate, giving time for Mozilla Firefox to rise out of the ashes of Netscape Navigator and offer an alternative so compelling that it forced Microsoft to compete again. I feel this way of thinking may also explain Microsoft's approach to controversial features such as telemetry and UI changes; where will users migrate to? Migrating to the Mac or Linux requires tradeoffs that a wide amount of users have decided through their actions are not worth migrating away from Windows despite some of Windows' problems.

“Developers developers developers!” was intended to be an actual strategy

Microsoft bought GitHub. It was already tremendously successful.

Developers are less likely to put up with crap because they will go and program their own competing product that is better

I was thinking about this before and only conclusion I came is that all of recent great MS software is open-sourced (VScode, .NET core, TypeScript, new Terminal app, PowerToys...)

github is still developed by Github Inc.

Because Microsoft is a platform company.

Only reason I have my local account linked to my Microsoft account is I actually use Xbox Live on Windows. Other than that the only time I got asked about it was during install.

Expanding:

> The most significant change is the elimination of local or “offline” accounts within Windows 10 Home—a fact that we were told in July and appears still to be the case. At present, Windows 11 Home PCs must be set up and administered with a Microsoft account, though local accounts can also be added later for additional users.

> To enable local accounts as part of the initial setup, you’ll need to install Windows 11 Pro, either via an in-place upgrade from Windows 10 or a clean installation. During the setup process, you’ll be prompted for your Microsoft account information. Simply click the “sign-in options” link instead. The next page will offer you the option to sign in with an offline account.

Did I understand correctly: does this mean that I need to have a working Internet connection to install Win11 (non-"Pro"), hoping that my NIC works during the installation process?

For the tabbed file explorer, just use Directory Opus. It's way better in every way and you can customize it until the cows come home. Friends don't let friends use (File) Explorer.

No offline accounts on the Home version is vile, however.

I’m blocking the Windows 11 update via group policy[1] until the Taskbar and Start Menu are usable.

I run software that is unusable without it being 1-taskbar-button-per-window. Forcing us to use 1-button-per-EXE with a slow-and-fiddly window sub-menu is so very user-hostile.

I suspect the decision to force single large buttons was to prompt third-party developers to have single-window-apps just like smartphones and tablets - which is just so wrong on so many levels.

Being dicks about MSAs in Home SKUs is also inexplicable. Do they really expect people will be okay with being stuck and unable to install Windows without a working internet connection? What if a computer has a modern NIC that Windows doesn’t have in-box drivers for? This. Is. Insane.

[1] Yes, I run an AD domain for my house.

At least they seem to have fixed auto-hide on multiple monitors, but I still have to turn it back on half the time I wake my computer from sleep.

Why suffer winblows 11 when you can do the same with plasma DE

Tolerates? Tolerates??

That attitude is exactly why I'm on Linux since 8 years back. I don't accept Microsoft telling me what my computer will do.

plus so called team's "integration". Clearly a move to use the dominate position of windows in OS space, to push out competitors like Slack, Zoom, and all others in the communication space.

> Offline account a pro feature: to sell Microsoft accounts, office 365 and onedrive

> Switching default browsers more difficult: to sell Edge and Bing.

> Taskbar is now in the center: to get people to click on icons such as Teams, Microsoft Search, and the new launcher which includes links to Microsoft services like office 365.

All the changes above are not for the benefits of consumers or other business that rely on Windows OS, for example, app developers, partners etc. Microsoft would brand and market them for the benefits of consumers. But at their core, they are about serving Microsoft bottom line. To use the dominate of position of windows OS in the PC(desktop and laptop) market, to push other lines of business from Microsoft. Microsoft have to continue to grow their revenue to justify their market cap right? That is where Microsoft's core interest is and what fundamentally propel them to do. And it shows up in what consumers will end up with, and it's not surprising at all. All that marketing doesn't hide this fact.

And Microsoft will do things slowly, like boiling frogs, slowly so people don't realize. Remember when Windows 10 was launching people expressed concerns about linking Microsoft account to windows and Microsoft replied offline account will always be here? Now they removed it from non-pro edition and calling it "improving our ability to deliver new features to consumers" or "bring consumers more value". Microsoft's strategy is get people to use Microsoft account, so people use other Microsoft services like onedrive and office, and have stronger ties with Microsoft. Now if you want a offline account, you have to fork more money, and a lot of laptop OEMs ship with non-pro version of windows because it's cheaper license. This will deter a lot of people, so people cave in and go with Microsoft's strategy. But in long run, Microsoft will make more money from people with Microsoft accounts than they lost from the cheaper windows non-pro license. The business executives and strategists have all this calculated.

If you mean "every other version", then yes, I member.

I think MS has shifted from that strategy into a new one, where we'll see improvements every fifth version or so. 20 years from now, we'll get "multiple displays works like a charm".

The taskbar being centered actually can make sense if you've ever used an ultrawide, or super ultrawide monitor. I use two vertically stacked 49" monitors but wouldn't keep it centered though; I actually hide it and only show it when I press the Win key, using a bunch of third-party programs that won't work with the rewritten XAML Island-based taskbar.

But making it the default setting is wrong IMO. I feel the new taskbar is clearly an attempt at copying MacOS's awful dock, replete with forced grouping and a small indicator below the icon to show which app is currently running.

With Microsoft, they get better with every other version. Goes back at least to Windows 2000. Windows Me, Vista, 8 were monsters, 2000, XP, 7 and 10 were nice enough. Whatever comes after 11 should be good again

Sounds like Microsoft is turning Windows into ChromeOS. Now I actually like ChromeOS a lot. But I do wish we'd keep some actual choices, instead of the same thing with different skins.

Even though my new Framework laptop supports Wayland, unfortunately I'll probably end up installing Windows on it. And largely because of the display manager.

Wayland itself works great on Ubuntu 21.04. But the screen resolution means I must run at a fractional resolution for it to be usable. And many of my apps require special flags to work directly with Wayland (Chrome and Electron apps), some exhibit bugs when running under Wayland (VS Code), and some don't directly support Wayland at all yet (IntelliJ IDEA)—meaning they have to run under X11 compatibility and suffer from blurry text at fractional scales: https://intellij-support.jetbrains.com/hc/en-us/articles/440...

I can still run Xorg of course, with the old requisite tweaks to prevent screen tearing on Intel graphics. But directly comparing the performance of Wayland and Xorg on the same machine seems night and day to me (in Wayland's favor, at least under fractional scaling), so I'll likely resort to Windows 10 until the app ecosystem catches up to Wayland.

(And that makes me sad: I actually prefer Linux for several non-ideological reasons, ranging from ZFS to not relying on unstable registry hacks to invert my mouse's scroll wheel.)

You don't need to wait any longer. NVIDIA updated their driver for full Wayland support a few months ago.

Or you could just buy an AMD GPU.

I've got a 1050ti that handles x11 and Wayland perfectly fine. I haven't put Wayland through it's paces with any games, but I've heard that the Nvidia 470.xx updates added in dramatically better xWayland support.

Sucks that Windows 7 is out of support now (and some games don’t work) and am forced to use Windows 10. If I could go back I would do so in a heartbeat.

On the Linux side I have i3 with XFCE on it and haven’t changed it for over a year. And it will probably stay that way (until Wayland supports Nvidia GPUs and becomes good enough, which will probably take a lot of time)

I'm switching to 10 LTSC (nb they renamed LTSB) 1809 this weekend to get ahead of the curve. Supported until January 2029. 11 came out six years after 10, so decent odds this can tide me over until 12. Unfortunately they reduced their support commitment for the upcoming 10 LTSC 21H2 to five years from release, so the older version is the best you can do.

Also FWIW, Microsoft does kind of give you a choice to obtain 10 LTSC legitimately, it's just a pain in the ass since it's very deliberately not intended for consumers. Described here: https://community.spiceworks.com/topic/2167558-explicit-inst...

I actually did it (using CDW, total cost US$319.15), in part because I'm a goody-goody I guess and in part because even if you can trust the ISO you got is good by verifying its checksum, god knows what the tool you use to bypass the copyright enforcement mechanism does.

If anyone reading this comment is interested in buying it, you should probably also know that the Open License volume purchasing program that the linked units are being sold under is getting discontinued in January 2022, so might want to decide whether to bite the bullet soon.

Don't tell us, tell Netflix.

Your Windows 11 PC will stop receiving security updates on XX date. For your safety and the safety of the global internet community, networking capabilities will be disabled on XX. Your PC will continue to operate normally.

If you would like to continue to receive security updates, please buy a Windows 365 subscription before XX.

Windows 10 as "the last verson" destroyed Microsoft's and hardware OEM's best marketing opportunity. New versions of Windows always got Microsoft lots of press, people bought new hardware, etc.

It was all marketing because there were major "service-pack" level upgrades to Windows 10 -- they were just confusingly named and you still needed to know about them.

Going back to versions is an improvement even if this particular version isn't one.

That "famous" quote is out of context nonsense. It refers to the technical changes in how the dev team creates the next version of windows by working directly on the current version. Compare the the past where a copy was uses as the base for a new windows which was developed separately from the current released version. It had/has nothing to do with the name which is a pure marketing decision.

>"Uhh, turns out we can't make that much money off of it"

Make no sense since its still an update and although it has a new name it does not need a new license. Beside that windows consumer license are not a significant revenue source since a long time.