News, tips, advice, support for Windows, Office, PCs & more
Home icon Home icon Home icon Email icon RSS icon

We're community supported and proud of it!

  • Most corporate PCs can’t install Windows 11, study says

    Home » Forums » AskWoody blog » Most corporate PCs can’t install Windows 11, study says

    • This topic has 44 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago.
    Author
    Topic
    #2399168

    ISSUE 18.42 • 2021-11-01 PUBLIC DEFENDER By Brian Livingston Microsoft has issued many, shall we say, evolving requirements for Windows 11 — confusing
    [See the full post at: Most corporate PCs can’t install Windows 11, study says]

    4 users thanked author for this post.
    Viewing 27 reply threads
    Author
    Replies
    • #2399173

      Most corporate PCs can’t install Windows 11, study says

      I wonder if this is really a surprise to anyone save those who still think all businesses replace PCs every 3-4 years just because they are, well, 3-4 years old. TPM and secure boot have been in PCs far longer than the supported CPUs have been available. It would have been a much bigger surprise if the CPU were not the biggest stumbling block.

      I also wonder how many machines failed because they are not set up for secure boot. Not they are incapable of secure boot, only that it is not in use. My one and only Windows 11 qualified PC was an example and enabling secure boot required reinstalling Windows. My research indicated there is not a reasonably straightforward way to convert from “legacy boot” to secure boot while preserving the disk’s contents.

      As I wrote in my October 18 column, there are few, if any, compelling new features in Win11 for most people, aside from cosmetic changes.

      For my money, those “cosmetic” changes in Windows 11 are a major reason to avoid it for as long as possible. Microsoft has yet again crippled a very usable and, most importantly, customizable interface. Did it learn nothing from Windows 8? Apparently, it did not.

      4 users thanked author for this post.
    • #2399179

      Something’s still not clear to me. Windows 11 aims at a more secure environment. Therefore the need for TPM 2.0. Machine’s not offering this won’t install Windows 11. Sounds fair. But if machines that don’t adhere to the specification still can run Windows 11 by means of a registry hack, what’s the implication for Windows 11 enhanced security?

      4 users thanked author for this post.
      • #2399227

        Because it’s not supported I don’t see businesses using this method to run 11.

        Susan Bradley Patch Lady

        1 user thanked author for this post.
        • #2399657

          I also suspect that there will be a lot of used business PCs that get the hack. I checked, and the Dell Optiplex 990 I got my dad still has a TPM in it: it’s just 1.2 instead of 2.0. It’s not like the average user will even notice or care if they can’t update Windows, which seems to be stupidest part of all of this.

    • #2399202

      My household has two servers (Synology and Netgear), three desktops running Windows 10, and two laptops. One laptop and one desktop do not qualify.

      I have left all Microsoft OS PCs except the laptop running Windows 10 and force upgraded the laptop whose CPU was no longer supported by HP.  Windows 11 seems to run fine on it but I may revert it back to Windows 10 to get updates.  What frosts my cake is the laptop was manufactured in early 2018 and has a 7th gen i7 Intel processor.  Its than capable for any application or game.

      Seems like a ploy to make more money to me.  I think Microsoft may have to rethink support and deployment.

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #2399176

      I’m watching MS go the same way as IBM did in the 80’s. Misunderstanding their market and the changing needs and as a result totally screwing itself as a company. It’s not just this latest debacle over Windows 11, but making cosmetic changes to Office applications that hinder functionality and destroy years of corporate knowledge and user training. Introducing products without adequate market testing or design. Destroying functional systems – looking at Onenote in particular as an example.

      Not trying to start an Apple war here, but having been accused of being an MS fanboi many times and having used MS since Dos 2.0 (or earlier). I made the decision to switch to Apple last year when my SP4 was unrepairable after less than 4-years. While I still have a couple of Windows devices, they are mostly shut down and only used for rare circumstances when I need something that is windows dependent (some older Astronomy stuff mainly). I’m sitting inside Apple’s walled garden (which is far from perfect) and watching what happens with MS with great relief that I no longer need to worry about their constant stuff ups.

      It’s really sad to see such a great company go down this path of self-immolation.

      7 users thanked author for this post.
      • #2399398

        Just to acknowledge that I posted this. I didn’t realise that I was not logged in when I posted.

      • #2399413

        > It’s really sad to see such a great company go down this path of self-immolation.

        it’s sad to see, but we’ve been seeing it for a long time — ever since frat boy Balmer took over. If Gates still ran the place and they treated their employees right for a change, they probably would have invented time travel by now.

        ==[ Know, when you see her, nothing can free her. ]==

    • #2399178

      Good article!! I run a (dual-boot) PC and an older ASUS N551VW laptop with an Intel i7-6700HQ CPU rated at 2.60 GHz with 16 GB RAM perfectly capable of running Windows 10 Pro, i.e. it has a 64-bit processor (with a 64-bit operating system) faster than 1 GHz clock speed. Yet Microsoft excludes it from a Windows 11 upgrade (only CPUs from ix-7xxx are compatible). Which CPU instructions do CPUs >= ix-7xxx have that an i7-6700HQ doesn’t have that Windows 11 essentially requires? Despite the fact that I don’t want Win11 on my laptop, I’d like to understand the “disqualification arguments” from Microsoft.

      2 users thanked author for this post.
    • #2399282

      System requirements from the article…
      “A Microsoft account and an Internet connection to enable first-time setup of Windows 11 Home Edition.”

      No more local accounts? If so is it just for Home Edition, can Pro users still use local accounts?

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #2399322

      My household has two servers (Synology and Netgear), three desktops running Windows 10, and two laptops. One laptop and one desktop do not qualify.

      I have left all Microsoft OS PCs except the laptop running Windows 10 and force upgraded the laptop whose CPU was no longer supported by HP.  Windows 11 seems to run fine on it but I may revert it back to Windows 10 to get updates.  What frosts my cake is the laptop was manufactured in early 2018 and has a 7th gen i7 Intel processor.  Its than capable for any application or game.

      Seems like a ploy to make more money to me.  I think Microsoft may have to rethink support and deployment.

      I have the same feeling about an HP Z-book.

      There is presumably some reason why Microsoft has disowned older CPUs (the microcode issues from several years ago being one), but it doesn’t really seem to be about simply processing power.

      That said, I agree the Microsoft should drop the hard line on upgrading existing PCs that run Windows 10. If the machine doesn’t perform acceptably after the upgrade, then its owner can revert to Windows 10, scrap the machine, convert it to Linux or use it as an end table. But, baring some technical reason why such a machine cannot run Windows 11, Microsoft should allow upgrades on such machines without hacks or other such trickery. The overall state of cybersecurity is not going to be enhanced by millions of PCs running Windows 10 after 10/14/2025.

      1 user thanked author for this post.
      • #2399790

        0patch.com still supports Windows 7. It is expected to also support Windows 10 when Microsoft moves to paid Enterprise support only. 0patch is the real deal.

        GreatAndPowerfulTech

    • #2399325

      Because it’s not supported I don’t see businesses using this method to run 11.

      You might be surprised but I bet some businesses, nonprofits, charities, etc. will upgrade to Windows 11 via the hack, which is pretty trivial as hacks go, simply because they cannot afford to replace their PCs. After all, the choice is between running unsupported (no patches, no updates) Windows 10 (after 14 Oct 2025) or running unsupported (which may or may not have patches and updates) Windows 11. As long as Microsoft allows those machines to update, it’s something of a no-brainer for them.

      If/when Microsoft stops allowing updates and patches for Windows 11 on unholy hardware, then – maybe – the calculus will change for them.

      • #2399394

        You’re missing the other likely options for Windows 10 users after October 2025, namely the purchase of a subscription with MS for paid monthly updates or the purchase of support from a third party company such as 0patch. In  other words, Windows 10 will continue to be supported the same way as Windows 7 is today, that is perfectly adequately but just not for free.

    • #2399364

      Survey : Majority PCs in enterprise not Windows 11 compatible

      🙂

      Because it’s not supported I don’t see businesses using this method to run 11.

      I do see businesses using the hack to install Windows 11 even just for testing current software / network compatibility before investing in new hardware.

    • #2399381

      MS has created, again, unnecessary problems for users of the software they bought from this company, in particular their sure-bet, big money-makers corporate (private and government) users. “Users” = “costumers.” Technology, when it comes to software, has to move with the times, in particular to deal with the increased need for better computer security. No question about that. But big questions concerning how to go about it. Take, for example, Apple’s recent move to use AMD-like RISC-type CPUs, because they are faster and more efficient than CISC ones, such as Intel’s. But Apple has made it very easy and painless to the users of Macs with Intel-CPU (like my own) to continue using them for “years to come”, by introducing “Universal” OS and applications that now come in two versions, for Intel macs and for the new “M1” Macs. “Years to come” is vague and could mean just another two or three years in actual fact, who knows? But it does give us time to move on without having to start ditching our still perfectly working computers soonest and go and buy new ones when at a higher than usual price, because of such factors as the current high price of CPUs and other chips.

      While many Windows users might have not been scrupulously observant of the best practices when it comes to how they have setup their computers or how often they have replaced them with new ones, the fact remains that these are all paying customers, and a pretty sound business principle is that “the customer is (often) right.” So MS management seems to be going, as correctly pointed out here already by Anonymous #2399176  , the way of IBM in the 80’s, as I see it for some of the same reasons, and for some worse ones as well. Not only not paying attention to the way things are going in their market, because of unfavorable economic factors and a disruption of manufacturing and distribution, due in part to the pandemic, has resulted, for example, in an undersupply of CPU chips, with a corresponding rise in their price and that of new computers. But also for what looks from here as plain brain-dead decision-making by top management.

      I think this company and their software, Windows in particular, no longer deserves the degree of customer loyalty that they have been enjoying for decades.

      Ex Windows user (Win. 98, XP, 7) since mid-2020. Now: running macOS Big Sur 11.6 & sometimes, Linux (Mint)

      MacBook Pro circa mid-2015, 15" display, with 16GB 1600 GHz DDR3 RAM, 1 TB SSD, a Haswell architecture Intel CPU with 4 Cores and 8 Threads model i7-4870HQ @ 2.50GHz.
      Intel Iris Pro GPU with Built-in Bus, VRAM 1.5 GB, Display 2880 x 1800 Retina, 24-Bit color.
      Waterfox "Current" and (now and then) Chrome. also Intego AV and Malwarebytes for the Mac.

    • #2399391

      I wonder if the survey also established how many of the corporate machines surveyed were still running Windows 7?

    • #2399405

      For the first time I have no intention of installing the latest and greatest on the 4 machines in our household.   Windows 11 is for me a non starter.

      I recently purchased a new “gamer” machine pre built  through cyberpowerpc, as I couldn’t get the components individually without considerable effort and cost.   I actually was very pleased with the end result.  I received a AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6 core 3701 MHz with  12 logical processor.   The PC has a RTX 3060 Nvidia video card plus the machine has 16 GB of RAM.   I was surprised that an update from MS recently flagged this 6 month old machine as incapable of upgrading to Windows 11.

      I honestly haven’t really looked at the bios to see if I can configure it to upgrade.  I did note that sysinfo says the following about device encryption support:

      Reasons for failed device encryption TPM is not usable .  PCR 5 binding is not supported.  Hardware Security Test interface failed and device is not Modern Standby , un-allowed DMA capable bus/devices detected TPM is not usable.

      Well that’s a slap in the face.

      So no MS … I’m not upgrading.

      Can I change the bios, edit the registry or whatever else is required on this machine and the other’s  … sure.    But why?   Just so you can comply with US gov’t requirement to meet some standard.  No  I’ll make the plunge and move to Linux like so many other of my colleagues that are dumping MS.

      Guess it’s time to change your name perhaps ?

    • #2399434

      I used Windows 11 as an Insider. I was hoping all the time MS will address the taksbar feedback, but they didn’t. There’s nothing especially compelling about Windows 11 and I like my taksbar on the right. So now I’m on 10 21H2.

      ASUS PRIME Z270-K * Intel Core i7-6700 * 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 2133 MHz * Aorus Radeon RX 570 4GB * Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD * SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB SSD * DVD RW Lite-ON iHAS 124 * Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer PCI * Windows 10 Pro 21H2 64-bit
      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #2399440

      I was surprised that an update from MS recently flagged this 6 month old machine as incapable of upgrading to Windows 11.

      Perhaps CyberPowerPC can provide some insight into the problems. It sounds like TPM 2 is present on the machine but somehow not configured correctly. If you’re inclined to chase it a bit, perhaps there’s a BIOS update that would resolve this?

    • #2399441

      You’re missing the other likely options for Windows 10 users after October 2025, namely the purchase of a subscription with MS for paid monthly updates or the purchase of support from a third party company such as 0patch. In  other words, Windows 10 will continue to be supported the same way as Windows 7 is today, that is perfectly adequately but just not for free.

      Not impossible, of course, particularly if the price is reasonable (Microsoft’s pricing for Windows 10 support is not, from what I understand) and there’s a serious effort to get the word out that this option even exists.

    • #2399442

      I wonder if the survey also established how many of the corporate machines surveyed were still running Windows 7?

      I’d really hope any Windows 7 machines air-gapped so that the data collection tools don’t even know they exist.

    • #2399445

      Take, for example, Apple’s recent move to use AMD-like RISC-type CPUs, because they are faster and more efficient than CISC ones, such as Intel’s. But Apple has made it very easy and painless to the users of Macs with Intel-CPU (like my own) to continue using them for “years to come”, by introducing “Universal” OS and applications that now come in two versions, for Intel macs and for the new “M1” Macs. “Years to come” is vague and could mean just another two or three years in actual fact, who knows? But it does give us time to move on without having to start ditching our still perfectly working computers soonest and go and buy new ones when at a higher than usual price, because of such factors as the current high price of CPUs and other chips.

      I generally agree with your assessment of MIrosoft’samazing tone-deafness, but it’s been so for at least 20 years. However, I do have to take you to task over your comparison with Apple quoted above.

      Microsoft has given a minimum of FOUR years to make whatever transition one is inclined to make. That’s how long it will be supporting Windows 10 (to 14 Oct 2025 to be exact). It’s not “years to come” but it’s more time that you credit Apple with allowing for the transition of hardware and it’s a date certain around which one can plan. As for applications, what runs on Windows 10 will almost certainly run on Windows 11 (though there will no doubt be some exceptions).

      • #2399547

        MHCLV941: I am not crediting Apple with giving people two or three years to move to the new Macs with RISC CPUs, that even if it were true would not be ideal, but would be better than what MS is doing right now (subject to future “yes, buts” and policy tweaks, rethinks, hacks …) that is a subject of this thread. No: I am merely guessing.

        What is undeniably is that Apple’s “for years to come” commitment is vague. But its commitments, for example on how long machines are going to be supported, have always been vague, not written and signed in blood anywhere. That is because of one overarching policy of Apple, in place more or less since the very start back in the early 80’s: playing with the cards very, very close to their chest. A good idea? For them, yes … But the fact has been, also throughout much of Apple’s existence so far, that machines have been supported for five years after the last one of the same model was sold by them, and that then these machines get some security updates for another two or even three after that, for a total of up to eight years. Whether this will be still so for people like me, who own Macs of the previous type, with Intel CISC CPUs, seems like a very good question right now. In my case, two or three years would be fine, because by then my Mac will be old enough to retire and for me to get a new one. Will we have that long? Who knows?

        Ex Windows user (Win. 98, XP, 7) since mid-2020. Now: running macOS Big Sur 11.6 & sometimes, Linux (Mint)

        MacBook Pro circa mid-2015, 15" display, with 16GB 1600 GHz DDR3 RAM, 1 TB SSD, a Haswell architecture Intel CPU with 4 Cores and 8 Threads model i7-4870HQ @ 2.50GHz.
        Intel Iris Pro GPU with Built-in Bus, VRAM 1.5 GB, Display 2880 x 1800 Retina, 24-Bit color.
        Waterfox "Current" and (now and then) Chrome. also Intego AV and Malwarebytes for the Mac.

    • #2399626

      So given the choice of purchasing a new laptop do I max it out and get Win11 installed or max it out and have it come with Win10?

      • #2399639

        10 Pro.

        10 Home is an ad server with rather limited user control.

        11’s not ready yet.  You’ll be able to upgrade for free for a long time, years, probably.

         

    • #2399637

      Well, yeah.  It’s not ready for general distribution yet much less business use.  It will be OK at some point.  How long did it take for Win 10 to overtake Win 7?  Years.  As I recall, businesses mostly skipped both 8’s and went directly to 10 from 7.  Win 8.1 worked fine; Win 11 is about where Win 8 was.  Win 11 may be supplanted; by what IDK.

      JMO but I don’t spend a lot of time looking at window title bars, backgrounds, etc. Win 11 doesn’t seem to bring anything beside a different base theme that could already be approximated on Win 10 with some fiddling.  If themes are your thing, go to Linux, the number of themes available are good for a lifetime of playing.

      Start with Breeze. 🙂

    • #2399656

      I’d argue that the CPU and TPM requirements are basically the same thing. Microsoft restricted the CPUs to the ones that are guaranteed to have a firmware TPM that supports TPM 2.0. It’s bizarre that they actually check the processor and not just the TPM.

      The actual CPU requirements are a 1.0 Ghz dual core with CMPXCHG16b instructions, which is all dual core processors except some early Core2Duos and older processors.

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #2399672

      Microsoft restricted the CPUs to the ones that are guaranteed to have

      That are guaranteed to have needed security features that pre 8th Gen CPUs don’t have, like : virtualization-based security (VBS), hypervisor-protected code integrity (HVCI)..

      1 user thanked author for this post.
    • #2399674

      Microsoft restricted the CPUs to the ones that are guaranteed to have

      That are guaranteed to have needed security features that pre 8th Gen CPUs don’t have, like : virtualization-based security (VBS), hypervisor-protected code integrity (HVCI)..

      Windows 11 does run on older CPUs, so why is a gen 8 or later CPU actually requried? For that matter, it will also run on a machine without TPM at all.

      Both features are certainly nice to have, mandatory in some circles, but why is Microsoft being so stiff about allowing existing machines to upgrade?

    • #2399676

      but why is Microsoft being so stiff about allowing existing machines to upgrade?

      Bacause Microsoft wants it users (mostly government and enterprises) to have the highest security available.

    • #2399679

      but why is Microsoft being so stiff about allowing existing machines to upgrade?

      Bacause Microsoft wants it users (mostly government and enterprises) to have the highest security available.

      That’s fine, but for many users, particularly many of them who are not “government and enterprises”, this will have the opposite effect. They will be running an unsupported OS in just under 4 years when they don’t have to be.

    • #2399796

      0patch.com still supports Windows 7. It is expected to also support Windows 10 when Microsoft moves to paid Enterprise support only. 0patch is the real deal.

      It may well be the real deal, but it’s also very much under the radar. The first reference to it that I can recall has been in this topic.

      At first blush, I’m not inspired. The site (www.0patch.com) does not require HTTPS and does not have an option to see prices in USD nor dor exempting purchases by non-EU customers from EU VAT.

      • #2399800

        0patch has been providing patches for Win7 since it went EOL in Jan 2020. THey do a very good job of taking care of the vulnerabiliities, often times ahead of Microsoft. Their Pro version (paid, about $29/year US) also provides updates for other applications.

    • #2399803

      0patch has been providing patches for Win7 since it went EOL in Jan 2020. THey do a very good job of taking care of the vulnerabiliities, often times ahead of Microsoft. Their Pro version (paid, about $29/year US) also provides updates for other applications.

      Do they have a US-facing website? One that deals is USD pricing and does not charge VAT?

      • #2399835

        del

        1 user thanked author for this post.
      • #2399872

        So What!
        The US is not the only source of safe, reliable, productive software.
        In fact, the EU seems to have a better grip on privacy than the US where the approach is “scrape off anything you can get.”

        Negative reasons for anything can be found if one looks hard enough.

    • #2399855

      Something’s still not clear to me. Windows 11 aims at a more secure environment. Therefore the need for TPM 2.0. Machine’s not offering this won’t install Windows 11. Sounds fair. But if machines that don’t adhere to the specification still can run Windows 11 by means of a registry hack, what’s the implication for Windows 11 enhanced security?

      What’s disabled by the hack is the hardware check(s) during installation. There’s no indication that the hack tells Windows 11 not to use TPM and the other things if they are present.

      Windows 11 even on “unsupported” hardware should be more secure than Windows 10, just not as secure as it would be on supported hardware.

    • #2399908

      So What!
      The US is not the only source of safe, reliable, productive software.
      In fact, the EU seems to have a better grip on privacy than the US where the approach is “scrape off anything you can get.”

      Negative reasons for anything can be found if one looks hard enough.

      I never said it was nor do I think so there is a problem with EU-developed software.

      However, I have made TWO, repeat TWO purchases from EU-based companies (AnyDesk and PowerDVD) using my UNITED STATES OF AMERICA address and BOTH companies charged VAT on the purchases.

      You’ll have to forgive me – no, actually I don’t care if you do or not – but while I do not have an issue with the product, I do have concerns about EU-based software companys’ business practics.

    Viewing 27 reply threads
    Reply To: Most corporate PCs can’t install Windows 11, study says

    You can use BBCodes to format your content.
    Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.