Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mofa2020]

[Weaver]

Thank you. When was cmpxchg16b introduced ? Thought everything x64 would have it, I must be daft though.

There is a history of requiring double-width cmpxchg instructions for locks in previous new versions, is there not? And a very good thing too.

[madhatter]

None of my hardware meets the requirements but for a laugh I installed it in a couple of VM's and a 2007
laptop. The installer on the ISO baulks at the hardware but I just used the Windows deployment tool, DISM,
which makes no hardware checks or needs any registry hacks to run.
Installed cleanly and runs fine.
The Patch Tuesday updates arrived on time and installed without incident. On the 2007 laptop, I downloaded
the fixes and applied them manually, again without any problems. It seems reports that updates would be
blocked on unsupported hardware are, for the time being, wrong. The actual .msu update files are still using the Windows 10 naming convention and both msinfo and the command prompt still describe the system as Windows 10.
To me the whole thing looks more like Windows 10.1 than 11

[Chrysalis]

Technically its not going to be much different to 10 at launch, the security features have been touted as some kind of major overhaul, but the majority of them already exist in 10.

The primary reason for the 11 rebrand, I still think is to force a new UI on people, force new requirements on developers (now DCH drivers are needed), and to allow new defaults to be adopted (these seem to be primarily for security reasons).

End users will always be more submissive to changes like this if its a new OS version rather than just an update to an existing OS. 

I have played with 11 on a VM like many others I have that curiosity, but I will take the same approach to my production machines I have always taken before which is to only upgrade if I have a big reason to upgrade, I have no big reason to upgrade to 11 right now.

There is some changes I like, the settings applet changes for instance, but I feel the overall desktop UI is a pretty big regression, as if they trying to put tablet UI onto desktop users, because Microsoft still refuse to make different OS builds for different devices, instead they want one for all devices.

[Weaver]

> Microsoft still refuse to make different OS builds for different devices, instead they want one for all devices.

Understandable - UI fragmentation is one of things that went towards killing Symbian, not forgetting the iPhone, and various other factors. So Microsoft is wise imo - I think they need an adaptive OS, or one with #ifdefs in it :-), so that at least they only have one codebase.

Confession: I worked for Symbian in 1998.

[Chrysalis]

I didnt know that killed Symbian, but I do agree, that one code base is ok if they could at least have some adaptiveness in the OS to allow people to change for their device type.

[Weaver]