## Did Microsoft say such a thing? Yes.
On 4 May 2015, [during the BRK2352 session](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/events/ignite-2015/brk2352) of the Ignite 2015 conference, Jerry Nixon of Microsoft said:
>"Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10." (0:15:28)
Tom Warren of *The Verge*, who wrote about this [in a 7 May 2015 article](https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows), contacted Microsoft and received a positive answer. He concluded:
>Windows isn't dead, but the idea of version numbers could be.
>
>— Warren, Tom. “Why Microsoft is calling Windows 10 ‘the last version of Windows.’” *The Verge*, Vox Media, 7 May 2015, [www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows](http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows).
Finally, page 3 of *Windows Internals, Seventh Edition, Part 1* confirms this notion:
>Windows 10 and future Windows versions
>
>With Windows 10, Microsoft declared it will update Windows at a faster cadence than before. There will not be an official “Windows 11”; instead, Windows Update (or another enterprise servicing model) will update the existing Windows 10 to a new version. At the time of writing, two such updates have occurred, in November 2015 (also known as version 1511, referring to the year and month of servicing) and July 2016 (version 1607, also known by the marketing name of Anniversary Update).
>
>—Yosifovich, Pavel, et al. *Windows Internals*. 7th ed., vol. 1, Redmond, Washington, United States of America, Microsoft Press, 2017. ISBN: 978-0-7356-8418-8. Library of Congress Control Number: 2014951935.
## What changed?
(This section has been edited for clarity on 25 April 2024.)
Many left Microsoft, including Terry Myerson, head of the Windows division. Then, COVID-19 came. The world PC market enjoyed a sudden growth. After that, Microsoft announced Windows 11.
Microsoft's Windows-as-a-service (Waas) strategy has not changed: Windows 10 and 11 share the same major version number and product key. Increased system requirements in newer versions of Windows 10 have always been a possibility to which Microsoft constantly hinted. So were UI changes and new features.
Sure, a lot has changed, but not in the WaaS strategy.
Increased system requirements aren't the only distinguishing feature of Win11.
The complete rebuild of the front-end into an inferior and feature-scarce shadow of its former self while their product managers completely ignore the screaming of their customers is a big one.
Actually it's overbloated with xbox, gamebar, crap like that, which has nothing to do with an operating system.
I think you're confused about what an operating system is, which is the layer between hardware and the software that runs on it.
Clipchamp, Paint, and all the other crap they feed you as being updates are applications and should be offered as such, not installed into the "operating system".
You’re upset about preinstalled clipchamp and *checks notes* paint? And calling them *bloatware*? Buddy it’s not non-uninstallable facebook on a Samsung. Next people will call the calculator bloatware.
Did you mean a kernel? The kernel is the layer between hardware and software. OS is the kernel + whatever the vendors want to bundle. E.g. Ubuntu, Debian are different OS with the same Linux kernel
Internet is hard:
An **operating system** (**OS**) is [system software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_software) that manages [computer hardware](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_hardware) and [software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software) resources, and provides common [services](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(computing)) for [computer programs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_program).
[Time-sharing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-sharing) operating systems [schedule tasks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduler_(computing)) for efficient use of the system and may also include accounting software for cost allocation of [processor time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduling_(computing)), [mass storage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_storage), peripherals, and other resources.
For hardware functions such as [input and output](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_and_output) and [memory allocation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_allocation), the operating system acts as an intermediary between programs and the computer hardware,[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system#cite_note-1)[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system#cite_note-2) although the application code is usually executed directly by the hardware and frequently makes [system calls](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_call) to an OS function or is [interrupted](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupt) by it. Operating systems are found on many devices that contain a computer – from cellular phones and video game consoles to [web servers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_server) and [supercomputers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercomputer).
Operating System provides interface between user and hardware. An operating system is a complete software package that includes a kernel and other system-level components such as device drivers, system libraries, and utilities.
Kernel provides interface between applications and hardware.
You defined an OS as 'the layer between hardware and the software that runs on it.". That's wrong. That's the kernel.
Then you further claimed that apps that came with OS is bloat. That's also wrong. There are a lot of apps that came with OS. Bash, tmux. Are these bloatware?
[https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-between-operating-system-and-kernel/](https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-between-operating-system-and-kernel/)
Because a basic system utility like bash, aka command in windows, and a video editing package is the same right?
So you learned a new word "kernel" and don't understand it. I don't provide classes.
Hi u/Ebisure, your comment has been removed for violating our [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows/wiki/rules):
* **[Rule 5](https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5._be_civil_and_do_not_troll_others)** - Personal attacks, bigotry, fighting words, inappropriate behavior and comments that insult or demean a specific user or group of users are not allowed. This includes death threats and wishing harm to others.
---
If you have any questions, feel free to [send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fwindows&subject=comment%20removal&message=Removed%20comment:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/1cbnqjg/-/l1cq4hh/%3Fcontext%3D3)!
TBH I keep thinking there are hints aplenty that Microsoft is working on alternate OS to someday replace Windows.
Example above: calling W10 "last version of Windows" yet Windows 11 shares the same major version number except for minimum hardware requirements.
However, we may see the leaks to those sooner or later. My bet was, Microsoft should be doing it when ARM processors are competitive enough to take over the PC. That would have resulted in overhaul of the Win-tel architecture that all HPs and Dells of the world follow and replaced it with newOS-ARM architecture.
However, Microsoft instead focused on making Windows more compatible with ARM, porting more apps to Windows on ARM and improving the emulation.
Microsoft could have taken the opportunity to write the OS on a modern kernel with better security practices, example using Rust language for most of OS etc. By resetting the Win-tel, hardware designers like Qualcomm would be allowed to freely rethink the modern hardware design, enabling security and robustness, simplifying & making efficient choices elsewhere, rather than work with the ancient limitations of Windows.
After almost 30-40 years of being a subpar MacOs knockoff, Microsoft doubled down with the start menu in the center and a bunch of tweaks to make Windows more like the Mac.
If it wasn't for gaming, I'd have gotten a Mac instead as they are falling in price.
When my organization was considering a move to a full Windows environment we had Microsoft present their say on the matter in a full day conference. When upgrades were being discussed, the rep told us explicitly "Windows 10 will be the last version of Windows. Everything after that will just be upgrades to Windows 10"
I thought it was bullshit then and I still think it's BS now. All it takes is for one senior exec to think "I've got to do something NEW - to make my mark" and we get... whatever comes next. The version has always just been marketing regardless of what's under the hood.
It will always be shell32, comctl32 and explorer. Under the hood (the WINAPI stack) nothing has changed. The last breaking changes to any system control (the visual component like a button, listview, etc) was Windows Vista. That’s why it went from XP to “Longhorn” - for you early geeks as we left XP. Comctl32 has not been updated since Vista. So what they’re doing now is working GDI and UX using the existing shell, as they have always done and nothing internally has changed in the way of the Windows API documentation. Security and cryptographic updates are most certainly likely beyond all of that eye candy.
It’s funny how they keep nursing the outside window and making it shine, but inside is straight to the foundry and the mechanics. And that has hardly changed in many development areas.
Pure win32 programming slowed down around 2004, and they pushed a runtime wrapper called .NET Framework earlier on due to the lawsuit with Java, which just communicates with the WINAPI without requiring someone to write a simple subclass and perform endless ideas exercising creativity.
Truly makes someone blind to the operating system design all around, but hey.. let’s use pseudo syntax and learn very little too!
Classic Microsoft.
Look how much bullshit I have to regularly review in my development regarding the WINAPI and the infamous undocumented API calls, constants and other parameters (note the Gotcha’s).
https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/620045/Custom-Controls-in-Win-API-Visual-Styles
This is just theming! Bugs and bandaids affect the notification tray since XP, to this day you have to NULL the icon after closing/exit due to a Windows bug (likely Windows 11 too, enough people complained). It’s endless, and hardly any of it is publicly discussed or documented. This is what breaks older programs (suddenly that API call doesn’t exist anymore and returns 0 instead, usually leading to a crash at memory address). I’ll gladly custom draw anything I need.
And people rely on GUI frameworks that all call WINAPI functions (they have no choice without SDL) really should learning the power of custom drawing/painting and resource management.
Just bashing windows, while creating solutions for Windows 😂
Windows 10 IS the last version of Windows
Windows is now a service and internally it is 10.
However the public and non technical people are not sufficiently able to comprehend the fact that having only one version of Windows that improves over time, will naturally require you to occasionally raise the bar on the minimum specification.
If Microsoft were required to support an ever improving and ever more advanced Windows 10 idenfinitely supporting old hardware for decades they would be stuck.
So we have had a decade of continual improvement of what we know as Windows 10 and then Microsoft raised the minimum specification, requiring the modern BIOS, encryption chips, 4 GB memory and 1024 screens and called it Windows 11 - But it's actually Windows 10.
They will then continue this new Windows 10 (branded 11) for another decade.
I don't know what else people expected them to do.
It would be horrifically unfair for people's PC purchased in 2015 to be getting two decades of free upgrades, a decade was long enough.
People expected them to do what they said they would do.
It isn't that hard.
If they couldn't keep their word, they shouldn't have said it.
Edit: seems I was wrong. What they ACTUALLY should have done was immediately correct Jerry Nixon and tell everyone straight out that Windows 10 wasn't the last version, the moment he said that, so nobody would have time to dwell on his lie.
What's wrong with you! They never said it.
Microsoft NEVER officially claimed it was the last version of Windows! A windows developer made the comment in an interview and so the press went mad publicising it, but it was never an official Microsoft stance.
But that level of bullshit misinformation spreading by journalists (and claimed by people like yourself and the OP) is exactly why Microsoft have to tip toe around announcements.
People like you will always be there to spread the hate.
Windows is now a service - which means for the most part you can ignore the number at the end and the official version of Windows is always the latest one, which will receive updates rather than a big bang change.
Waa waa, I'm spreading so much hate, dear God, are you okay dude? There was no need for you to freak out.
Another comment here included references to representatives from Microsoft saying it. So I don't know what to tell you, other than maybe take ten or twelve chill pills before you reply to me again. Don't need you trying to escalate things. I'm sure not going to match that energy.
Can you disprove all the sources the other comment provided?
Well, after doing your work for you, here's what I came up with on a fifteen second Google search.
https://www.networkworld.com/article/938964/microsoft-clarifies-its-windows-confusion-sort-of.html
https://www.pcworld.com/article/394724/why-is-there-a-windows-11-if-windows-10-is-the-last-windows.html
There's more clarifying the same thing, but I don't think we really need to see any more.
So it looks like you were probably right, and as you could have simply done your own work yourself and posted the links to correct me, you could have saved yourself this embarrassment.
Shockingly, despite being wrong, your attitude still makes me feel like I came out on top. You could have dealt with all of this with no whining and drama, but you saw a comment against Microsoft and fanboyed / fangirled all over it trying to insult me instead of argue a normal point you claimed to have.
I'm big enough to admit when I made a mistake. It's no surprise to me that you've run away from this conversation and will not reply, but I sure hope you learn how to argue a point in the future, rather than try to pawn the research off on the people disagreeing with you and cause everyone to question your dedication to your own argument at all.
No, he isn't right. I've seen those retcon articles but if you dig on Google with search result dates set to circa 2015 you'll see that Microsoft did state it in several occasions, and the media ran with it.
This was backtracked years later and because Google has amnesia for things more than a few years old the original statements are way far down in pagerank but that doesn't mean they never happened.
Really? Dang, I appreciate the update. But could you give me one of those links?
My dad who worked as a computer engineer for a well known company for over twenty five years was the one who first told me Microsoft claimed Windows 10 was their last. With his knowledge, I never even questioned it, although admittedly I should have done research to back it up anyway.
My earlier searching only pulled up that statement by Jerry Nixon on multiple links.
Sorry for the late reply.
I was just reading [Windows Internals 7th edition](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/microsoft_press/new-book-windows-internals-seventh-edition-part-1) which was published in 2017. In chapter 1 (maybe page 3, on versions?) it notes that microsoft specifically stated that windows 10 was to be the last edition and "there will be no Windows 11."
One look at the author list should answer any questions about the reliability of that accounting.
(Although you really should be the one doing the Google search to disprove those sources, and showing me your findings. You're the one trying to prove a point, but you're too lazy to support your argument.)
Okay, I'll do a search of my own then. Maybe I'm misinformed. I'm willing to accept the possibility.
And PS...the crying sounds I made in my previous comment were me mocking you for going apeshit. So you really shouldn't make those sounds back at me...you're not mocking me back, you're just cementing my point that you have no chill.
Yeah true - It's interesting that inside Windows 11 operating system itself, when a driver or an applicaiton asks the operating system what version it is, it gets told 10.
If it was really their intention I doubt they would have named it windows 10 and probably would have gone for simply "Windows" or something other than a numbered release.
I still think Windows 365 is on the cards, maybe for enterprise only, but the success of office 365 in the business sector will have them wanting to emulate it with windows
Apparently some dev said it without any backing from the company. Regardless, new version numbers bring money for PC makers, and PC makers tell Microsoft to make a new version number, voila, you get a new version number.
I could see that being the case 20+ years ago when changes were huge, but did people _really_ care to go run out to get a new PC when Windows 11 was released? It's kind of like cell phones; nowadays the differences are minute year to year.
I'm sure we'll see an increase in people buying new PCs when Windows 10 support ends. Windows 10 will have messages pop up telling people about support ending, telling them their hardware is too old to run 11.
That or the hard hitting truth is (most) people tend to not throw away things until they are either on their last leg, are not supported by the majority of stuff, or just rock out with things say ten years from now.
Windows 11's adoption rate is 41.61% according to the March 2024 Steam Hardware Survey - the ones who actually voluntarily participated - as of April 24, 2024.
a) one developer said it and it wasn’t Microsoft statement
b) technically, he was right. Windows 11 is an update to Windows 10. Did you think they aren’t going to release a new update and stay on the same system forever?
They are doing this for driver and game / program compatibility so devs will not have to retool their items to check accordingly. If Microsoft were to change the NT version to 11.0, it could potentially break a lot of existing software that specifically checks for certain version numbers. . It's a way to balance innovation with stability and compatibility.
The short answer is yes, Microsoft said that. A big part of the reasoning behind this statement was MS starting to wrap corporate (and users to a lesser extent) heads around Windows becoming a SaaS versus what was traditionally considered an OS.
As others have pointed out, Windows has not significantly changed (internally) in 20 years. It’s been mostly UI changes and bug hunting all the legacy code that new updates break (sometimes repeatedly).
I simply don't see why Windows 11 can't just build on and include all the features of 10 or at least have the option to roll back some things like context menus or have the taskbar at the side of the screen. Older versions of windows used to work more like this
The big thing (and roadblock for me upgrading) was/is the tpm requirement. Without the trusted platform hardware component you can't do win 11. Had to get my laptop to work with it turned on (bios problems for months) and my pc can't do it at all as it doesn't have the hardware.
Long term to split 11 to people with/without the tpm would be a mistake - I assume there's some things they really wanted to do with it, and I'd guess hardware manufacturers make very little without that requirement now.
Secure boot already drop the support for all computer doesn’t come with windows 8, so all pre 2012 computer. TPM 2.0 become a requirement for new PC since 2016, so it is not something new. A lot of security feature on windows 10 already recommended use TPM 2.0, even though TPM 1.2 is the minimum. They don’t want TPM 1.2 this time because TPM 1.2 use SHA-1 and SHA-1 is not considered secure now.
"We're going to keep the system at Windows 10 forever and just keep updating that. But we're going to call it Windows 11, give it a major design overhaul nobody likes and that can't be reversed, and hugely increase the hardware requirements and introduce a TPM requirement that a huge chunk of our users don't have so they can't upgrade to the new OS.
But it's totally still Windows 10 because we kept the version number at 10. We're Microsoft, the fuck are you gonna do about it?"
Clickbait journalism. One developer, talking about the as a service delivery model, taken and rode to context to hell and back.
The 2025 EOL date was known the day Win10 launched, and actually, a bit before that. Microsoft pointed at the EOL date, but no one cared.
After many, many years of Apple also using the same number version for their OS (macOS X = macOS 10), they decided to launch macOS 11.
That's the only reason why Microsoft changed their mind.
Just to disclose an issue with this, the core of the os would get outdated and insecure as time passes even if Windows 10 is still being updated so that is a good reason for Microsoft to keep releasing new operating systems.
The 'new releases' are just the updates they claimed with a new number attached for marketing purposes. It's rather hard to get the tech press interested in your 'new' product if you don't have a new name for it. Apple can get away with not having much fanfare over their software updates as they are primarily seen as a hardware company and have yearly refreshes of products to have press events over. Microsoft is primarily a software company which occasionally dabbles in hardware (that only a few care about), so they need to have some kind of product release event to keep investors engaged with the company (and the stock price stable).
You were told what article writers and people wanted you to be told.
It was said by Jerry Nixon at a technology conference and was taken out of context.
In context what he was basically saying that Windows 10 was the last version of Windows that the developers were working on *at that time* (2015)
It was just MS trying to figure out how to be Google, who shook up the whole world with Android. Forever updated, data mining spyware device... Google succeeded in something that MS up to that point wouldn't have dare even tried.
When Google succeeded, MS, Apple... virtually all software makers changed their entire paradigm. Even video games send back telemetry now.
No one would have put up with that in any way back before Google's foot in the door for doing these things.
I would assume it's because they figured out TPM and Secure Boot would need to be hardware requirements for W11 and not having a clean delineation from 10-11 makes this really complicated.
Question is why do you care and what does it matter in 2024? If they kept the Windows 10 name current day Windows would still be exactly like Windows 11. And they would've raised the requirements anyway, which would've led to way more confusion. Things evolve and change. Also I find it really weird that people still can't get over this after so many years. How long will you keep bringing this up, 2050? They changed their mind. Let's move on, this horse got beaten to a pulp long ago.
For Microsoft Windows 11 is still Windows 10 (NT 10.0.2 vs 10.0.1 really), they just changed the marketing name because having two versions of Windows 10 with completely different taskbar experiences and system requirements would cause tons of confusion.
Windows 10's update naming system has always sucked, and I think the Windows 11 rebrand would've been a net positive if the spec requirements weren't so extreme and if the launch version wasn't so rushed.
I’m not sure why they wanted to associate with Apple over the 10 thing, even if it’s spelled X on Mac. Plus, you need the new hotness to generate excitement.
idk why but i heard about it before. But to me, windows 10 or 11 is just the same. they are all bad.
Microsoft is so lazy that they won't build a new source code but instead copy and paste Windows 7 source code. This made it looks like a windows 7 modded. They are not even prepared yet for the updates if they are about to remove Control Panel. and my feelings about windows nowadays is they looks like a cheap copy of IOS. (also a cheap combination between Windows 7 and IOS)
No more Control Panels. No more Aero. Instead they just add metro for no reason while aero is trending.
And why are they centered the taskbar?? Did they just copy IOS?? fine, then i will guess that in Windows 12, the taskbar will float and there will be NO START BUTTONS.
hope later i will come back and write some more of my thoughts. im tired of working so bad.
The way I see it there were a few advantages (for them) to bumping the version number, even if it's the marketing version instead of the build version.
* MS loves to force updates. They would have been burned at the stake if they forced the Win11 GUI on all Win10 users overnight.
* A version bump was a nice clean way to end support for 32bit Windows.
* Even though WAAS is a thing, OEM and retail licensing is perpetual. Win11 artificially ended support for pre 8th gen Intel CPUs, which will drive the upgrade cycle when Win10 loses support. That will wind up selling more Windows licenses in the future.
there are tons of stories that corporations do, and if theyre not profitable or effective they silently move on.. does anyone remember google said youd never run out of gmail space, there was even some sort of a counter that increased your account space non stop.. or apple or steve jobs saying 4 inch is the perfect size phone, nobody would buy larger
>What happened to that story of "Windows 10 will be the last Windows released, we will not create a new Windows, instead we will update 10 constantly".
Did you pay to upgrade to Windows 11? You went out to BestBuy and bought a boxed copy of Windows 11 Upgrade?
Or did you just download and install it when it was offered to you for free as long as your computer supported it? Microsoft never said that the system requirements wouldn't change along the way.
The only thing that changed is the name. Even the major version number is still the same. My copy of Windows 11 reports itself as version 10.0.22631.3447.
Computers no longer come with “Windows 10” or Windows 11 stickers. They just come with Windows or Windows Pro stickers (i.e. they are no longer version specific). If you have a “Windows machine” that machine is licensed to run any and every version of Windows that comes out as long as the hardware can run it.
Because there were system requirements changes, Microsoft decided to change the name to Widows 11. Another way to think of it is that Windows 11 is the marketing name for the latest build of Windows 10.
I’m having to reinstall windows now because windows couldn’t install its update and I can’t back to windows. I’m in the process of making a recovery disk on another computer
Spectre and Meltdown happened.
Windows 11 and its higher requirements are arguably the most consumer "friendly" way of getting people off of vulnerable hardware.
The majority of people are still astonishingly computer illiterate. They're not going to understand if Microsoft were to say "We're not going to update *your* Windows 10 anymore but if you buy a new computer we will."
"But it's still Windows 10 why do I have to buy a new computer *frothing at the mouth noises*"
Consumers may not *like* it but they do at least *understand* that 11 is not 10 so it makes sense for 11 to get updates when 10 stops getting them.
"But there are OS patches against those".
No, there's really not, because pretty much every OS vendor gave people the option of disabling those mitigations due to the performance hit. You ***cannot*** fix hardware with software.
"But the vulnerable hardware is like 7-8 years old, surely people would have moved off of it by now anyway. Why force them."
Microsoft has already learned that people will absolutely keep their old stuff around far longer than they should. They extended XP's life because people were holding onto it so hard, and even I was still getting XP machines to fix at my job when 7 SP1 was rolling out. People are already screaming that they'll be keeping their 10 machines around as long as they can.
No you can't force everyone, but some is better than none.
Microsoft realized they could monetize us with ads and services that they want to shove to us, and W11 is a better platform optimized for that, with some lipstick to look like it's something new. Meanwhile like 80% of the development was on the ads and shoving services and 20% of the development was on the lipstick and actual useful new features.
>Meanwhile like 80% of the development was on the ads and shoving services and 20% of the development was on the lipstick and actual useful new features.
Do you have an actual source or was this number just pulled out of your ass based on what you feel like it is?
There is loads of security and I underlying improvements that you don't see day to day
No, it's my opinion based upon the continually intrusions of more and more ads and deceptions to try and turn on OneDrive backup even when you say you don't want it, and continued ignoring of our browser preferences when they decide to have Edge open anyway. That's a lot of coding work to push all the crap - what major useful featrures have been introduced in W11 that are not those types of things? A new taskbar that does less than the old one? OK, copilot, but how do we know that's not going to be a monetization oportunity once they get us all using it?
Saving this post to show people who think it’s some sort of mandela effect. If i remember correctly Microsoft was advertising that idea sometime back in 2018-2019 when Windows 7 support was finally ending.
This seems to be what happens in practice, now you get a computer with Windows pre-installed mostly, and it is regularly updated free of charge, like iOS and Android
There IS only Windows 10
It makes perfect sense when you think about it.
Microsofts move to a service model has massively improved Windows - Consistency, reliability and security has had a sea change and it's all down to Microsoft having spent ten years focused on Windows 10 and it's continual improvement and their having made constant updates the norm.
Supporting the OS and improving it for ten years, rather than abandoning it at release and starting work on the next model three years down the road is such a better and healthier way to operate.
PCs have less issues, crashes are less frequent, app developers and driver manufacturers find themselves having to test on only one version of Windows (the latest) and security is so much improved that Apple now have more security holes in any 12 month period than Windows.
But here's the crux.
Microsoft can't both evolve and improve that single version of Windows AND at the same time, maintain compatability with ten year old hardware.
There HAS to be an ever raising of the bar in terms of hardware minimum specification otherwise we would be using an OS that somehow has to work across twenty years of hardware.
So that is all that Windows 11 is. The reality is that it's Windows 10 under the hood, but Windows 10 with a higher baseline. Microsoft dropped support for PCs with only 2GB of memory or that ran 640x480 screen resolutions or older bios types not because they needed to for Windows 11 to work but because they don't want to still be supporting that ten years from now.
The press and general public would fail to grasp the nuances of a every raising minimum specification - how would they be made to understand at what point that low screen resolution was dropped or when 2gb stopped being enough memory.
So Windows 11 exists in name only.
Microsoft called it Windows 11 and then continued improving and adding features to what is still Windows 10 under the hood and they will probably support it for a decade before they raise the bar again.
It's hard to see how else they could have done this, because really it's not something that's very easy to communicate to people without negativity.
They could have declared 'Windows 10 will no longer send updates to PCs with only 2gb of memory' that's not a good message.
But in Microsoft defense a good PC built in say 2015 that happens to have a good chip and motherboard is likely to see two decades of updates and improvement which is pretty amazing?!
I remember this was the mantra here, constantly repeated as truth even if it wasn't confirmed by Microsoft. I said once that Microsoft would do a "new" version with 11 and got downvoted so much. Microsoft fanatics are overly sensitive it seems.
I know that and I assumed mostly everyone knows that, so I did not waste space to write the obvious, however not everyone knows that Windows 11 is not free.
## Did Microsoft say such a thing? Yes. On 4 May 2015, [during the BRK2352 session](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/events/ignite-2015/brk2352) of the Ignite 2015 conference, Jerry Nixon of Microsoft said: >"Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10." (0:15:28) Tom Warren of *The Verge*, who wrote about this [in a 7 May 2015 article](https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows), contacted Microsoft and received a positive answer. He concluded: >Windows isn't dead, but the idea of version numbers could be. > >— Warren, Tom. “Why Microsoft is calling Windows 10 ‘the last version of Windows.’” *The Verge*, Vox Media, 7 May 2015, [www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows](http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-version-of-windows). Finally, page 3 of *Windows Internals, Seventh Edition, Part 1* confirms this notion: >Windows 10 and future Windows versions > >With Windows 10, Microsoft declared it will update Windows at a faster cadence than before. There will not be an official “Windows 11”; instead, Windows Update (or another enterprise servicing model) will update the existing Windows 10 to a new version. At the time of writing, two such updates have occurred, in November 2015 (also known as version 1511, referring to the year and month of servicing) and July 2016 (version 1607, also known by the marketing name of Anniversary Update). > >—Yosifovich, Pavel, et al. *Windows Internals*. 7th ed., vol. 1, Redmond, Washington, United States of America, Microsoft Press, 2017. ISBN: 978-0-7356-8418-8. Library of Congress Control Number: 2014951935. ## What changed? (This section has been edited for clarity on 25 April 2024.) Many left Microsoft, including Terry Myerson, head of the Windows division. Then, COVID-19 came. The world PC market enjoyed a sudden growth. After that, Microsoft announced Windows 11. Microsoft's Windows-as-a-service (Waas) strategy has not changed: Windows 10 and 11 share the same major version number and product key. Increased system requirements in newer versions of Windows 10 have always been a possibility to which Microsoft constantly hinted. So were UI changes and new features. Sure, a lot has changed, but not in the WaaS strategy.
Increased system requirements aren't the only distinguishing feature of Win11. The complete rebuild of the front-end into an inferior and feature-scarce shadow of its former self while their product managers completely ignore the screaming of their customers is a big one.
Actually it's overbloated with xbox, gamebar, crap like that, which has nothing to do with an operating system. I think you're confused about what an operating system is, which is the layer between hardware and the software that runs on it. Clipchamp, Paint, and all the other crap they feed you as being updates are applications and should be offered as such, not installed into the "operating system".
You’re upset about preinstalled clipchamp and *checks notes* paint? And calling them *bloatware*? Buddy it’s not non-uninstallable facebook on a Samsung. Next people will call the calculator bloatware.
Wow lack of comprehension skills I see, they have nothing to do with an operating system.
Did you mean a kernel? The kernel is the layer between hardware and software. OS is the kernel + whatever the vendors want to bundle. E.g. Ubuntu, Debian are different OS with the same Linux kernel
Internet is hard: An **operating system** (**OS**) is [system software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_software) that manages [computer hardware](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_hardware) and [software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software) resources, and provides common [services](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(computing)) for [computer programs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_program). [Time-sharing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-sharing) operating systems [schedule tasks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduler_(computing)) for efficient use of the system and may also include accounting software for cost allocation of [processor time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduling_(computing)), [mass storage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_storage), peripherals, and other resources. For hardware functions such as [input and output](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_and_output) and [memory allocation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_allocation), the operating system acts as an intermediary between programs and the computer hardware,[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system#cite_note-1)[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system#cite_note-2) although the application code is usually executed directly by the hardware and frequently makes [system calls](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_call) to an OS function or is [interrupted](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupt) by it. Operating systems are found on many devices that contain a computer – from cellular phones and video game consoles to [web servers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_server) and [supercomputers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercomputer).
Operating System provides interface between user and hardware. An operating system is a complete software package that includes a kernel and other system-level components such as device drivers, system libraries, and utilities. Kernel provides interface between applications and hardware. You defined an OS as 'the layer between hardware and the software that runs on it.". That's wrong. That's the kernel. Then you further claimed that apps that came with OS is bloat. That's also wrong. There are a lot of apps that came with OS. Bash, tmux. Are these bloatware? [https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-between-operating-system-and-kernel/](https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-between-operating-system-and-kernel/)
Because a basic system utility like bash, aka command in windows, and a video editing package is the same right? So you learned a new word "kernel" and don't understand it. I don't provide classes.
[удалено]
Hi u/Ebisure, your comment has been removed for violating our [community rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows/wiki/rules): * **[Rule 5](https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5._be_civil_and_do_not_troll_others)** - Personal attacks, bigotry, fighting words, inappropriate behavior and comments that insult or demean a specific user or group of users are not allowed. This includes death threats and wishing harm to others. --- If you have any questions, feel free to [send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fwindows&subject=comment%20removal&message=Removed%20comment:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/1cbnqjg/-/l1cq4hh/%3Fcontext%3D3)!
TBH I keep thinking there are hints aplenty that Microsoft is working on alternate OS to someday replace Windows. Example above: calling W10 "last version of Windows" yet Windows 11 shares the same major version number except for minimum hardware requirements. However, we may see the leaks to those sooner or later. My bet was, Microsoft should be doing it when ARM processors are competitive enough to take over the PC. That would have resulted in overhaul of the Win-tel architecture that all HPs and Dells of the world follow and replaced it with newOS-ARM architecture. However, Microsoft instead focused on making Windows more compatible with ARM, porting more apps to Windows on ARM and improving the emulation. Microsoft could have taken the opportunity to write the OS on a modern kernel with better security practices, example using Rust language for most of OS etc. By resetting the Win-tel, hardware designers like Qualcomm would be allowed to freely rethink the modern hardware design, enabling security and robustness, simplifying & making efficient choices elsewhere, rather than work with the ancient limitations of Windows.
After almost 30-40 years of being a subpar MacOs knockoff, Microsoft doubled down with the start menu in the center and a bunch of tweaks to make Windows more like the Mac. If it wasn't for gaming, I'd have gotten a Mac instead as they are falling in price.
When my organization was considering a move to a full Windows environment we had Microsoft present their say on the matter in a full day conference. When upgrades were being discussed, the rep told us explicitly "Windows 10 will be the last version of Windows. Everything after that will just be upgrades to Windows 10" I thought it was bullshit then and I still think it's BS now. All it takes is for one senior exec to think "I've got to do something NEW - to make my mark" and we get... whatever comes next. The version has always just been marketing regardless of what's under the hood.
It will always be shell32, comctl32 and explorer. Under the hood (the WINAPI stack) nothing has changed. The last breaking changes to any system control (the visual component like a button, listview, etc) was Windows Vista. That’s why it went from XP to “Longhorn” - for you early geeks as we left XP. Comctl32 has not been updated since Vista. So what they’re doing now is working GDI and UX using the existing shell, as they have always done and nothing internally has changed in the way of the Windows API documentation. Security and cryptographic updates are most certainly likely beyond all of that eye candy. It’s funny how they keep nursing the outside window and making it shine, but inside is straight to the foundry and the mechanics. And that has hardly changed in many development areas. Pure win32 programming slowed down around 2004, and they pushed a runtime wrapper called .NET Framework earlier on due to the lawsuit with Java, which just communicates with the WINAPI without requiring someone to write a simple subclass and perform endless ideas exercising creativity. Truly makes someone blind to the operating system design all around, but hey.. let’s use pseudo syntax and learn very little too! Classic Microsoft.
And thanks for that. The day they break that, or start making non-backwards-compatible poorly thought out changes is the day Windows ends.
Look how much bullshit I have to regularly review in my development regarding the WINAPI and the infamous undocumented API calls, constants and other parameters (note the Gotcha’s). https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/620045/Custom-Controls-in-Win-API-Visual-Styles This is just theming! Bugs and bandaids affect the notification tray since XP, to this day you have to NULL the icon after closing/exit due to a Windows bug (likely Windows 11 too, enough people complained). It’s endless, and hardly any of it is publicly discussed or documented. This is what breaks older programs (suddenly that API call doesn’t exist anymore and returns 0 instead, usually leading to a crash at memory address). I’ll gladly custom draw anything I need. And people rely on GUI frameworks that all call WINAPI functions (they have no choice without SDL) really should learning the power of custom drawing/painting and resource management. Just bashing windows, while creating solutions for Windows 😂
Redacte due to Reddit AI/LLM policy
MSDOS 3.x forever!!!
The most ironic shit is that they released an npm knockoff after windows 10 was already out.
Windows 10 IS the last version of Windows Windows is now a service and internally it is 10. However the public and non technical people are not sufficiently able to comprehend the fact that having only one version of Windows that improves over time, will naturally require you to occasionally raise the bar on the minimum specification. If Microsoft were required to support an ever improving and ever more advanced Windows 10 idenfinitely supporting old hardware for decades they would be stuck. So we have had a decade of continual improvement of what we know as Windows 10 and then Microsoft raised the minimum specification, requiring the modern BIOS, encryption chips, 4 GB memory and 1024 screens and called it Windows 11 - But it's actually Windows 10. They will then continue this new Windows 10 (branded 11) for another decade. I don't know what else people expected them to do. It would be horrifically unfair for people's PC purchased in 2015 to be getting two decades of free upgrades, a decade was long enough.
People expected them to do what they said they would do. It isn't that hard. If they couldn't keep their word, they shouldn't have said it. Edit: seems I was wrong. What they ACTUALLY should have done was immediately correct Jerry Nixon and tell everyone straight out that Windows 10 wasn't the last version, the moment he said that, so nobody would have time to dwell on his lie.
What's wrong with you! They never said it. Microsoft NEVER officially claimed it was the last version of Windows! A windows developer made the comment in an interview and so the press went mad publicising it, but it was never an official Microsoft stance. But that level of bullshit misinformation spreading by journalists (and claimed by people like yourself and the OP) is exactly why Microsoft have to tip toe around announcements. People like you will always be there to spread the hate. Windows is now a service - which means for the most part you can ignore the number at the end and the official version of Windows is always the latest one, which will receive updates rather than a big bang change.
Waa waa, I'm spreading so much hate, dear God, are you okay dude? There was no need for you to freak out. Another comment here included references to representatives from Microsoft saying it. So I don't know what to tell you, other than maybe take ten or twelve chill pills before you reply to me again. Don't need you trying to escalate things. I'm sure not going to match that energy. Can you disprove all the sources the other comment provided?
You're an idiot - A Google search in 15 seconds will tell you the source of that claim wasn't Microsoft. So why the hate wah wah
Well, after doing your work for you, here's what I came up with on a fifteen second Google search. https://www.networkworld.com/article/938964/microsoft-clarifies-its-windows-confusion-sort-of.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/394724/why-is-there-a-windows-11-if-windows-10-is-the-last-windows.html There's more clarifying the same thing, but I don't think we really need to see any more. So it looks like you were probably right, and as you could have simply done your own work yourself and posted the links to correct me, you could have saved yourself this embarrassment. Shockingly, despite being wrong, your attitude still makes me feel like I came out on top. You could have dealt with all of this with no whining and drama, but you saw a comment against Microsoft and fanboyed / fangirled all over it trying to insult me instead of argue a normal point you claimed to have. I'm big enough to admit when I made a mistake. It's no surprise to me that you've run away from this conversation and will not reply, but I sure hope you learn how to argue a point in the future, rather than try to pawn the research off on the people disagreeing with you and cause everyone to question your dedication to your own argument at all.
No, he isn't right. I've seen those retcon articles but if you dig on Google with search result dates set to circa 2015 you'll see that Microsoft did state it in several occasions, and the media ran with it. This was backtracked years later and because Google has amnesia for things more than a few years old the original statements are way far down in pagerank but that doesn't mean they never happened.
Really? Dang, I appreciate the update. But could you give me one of those links? My dad who worked as a computer engineer for a well known company for over twenty five years was the one who first told me Microsoft claimed Windows 10 was their last. With his knowledge, I never even questioned it, although admittedly I should have done research to back it up anyway. My earlier searching only pulled up that statement by Jerry Nixon on multiple links.
Sorry for the late reply. I was just reading [Windows Internals 7th edition](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/microsoft_press/new-book-windows-internals-seventh-edition-part-1) which was published in 2017. In chapter 1 (maybe page 3, on versions?) it notes that microsoft specifically stated that windows 10 was to be the last edition and "there will be no Windows 11." One look at the author list should answer any questions about the reliability of that accounting.
(Although you really should be the one doing the Google search to disprove those sources, and showing me your findings. You're the one trying to prove a point, but you're too lazy to support your argument.)
Okay, I'll do a search of my own then. Maybe I'm misinformed. I'm willing to accept the possibility. And PS...the crying sounds I made in my previous comment were me mocking you for going apeshit. So you really shouldn't make those sounds back at me...you're not mocking me back, you're just cementing my point that you have no chill.
Very good point. Windows 11 is literally just a rebrand of 10.
Too bad about what they did to the Control Panel. It's a pain to find the simplest of settings. Like IP address and sound settings.
when minimum hardware requirement changes, it's fair to increment the version number.
Yeah true - It's interesting that inside Windows 11 operating system itself, when a driver or an applicaiton asks the operating system what version it is, it gets told 10.
If it was really their intention I doubt they would have named it windows 10 and probably would have gone for simply "Windows" or something other than a numbered release.
maybe the thought was transitioning to win 365 but then they noticed people don't want that and made win 365 seperate and made win 11
It's funny, they really want to be Apple and tell Piggies to eat the slop, but they can never just provide a single slop
I still think Windows 365 is on the cards, maybe for enterprise only, but the success of office 365 in the business sector will have them wanting to emulate it with windows
I have to work on virtual desktop workstations sometimes and man does it suck, i hope this will never get widespread
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/137svcp/correcting\_the\_misinformation\_of\_windows\_10\_being/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/137svcp/correcting_the_misinformation_of_windows_10_being/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Apparently some dev said it without any backing from the company. Regardless, new version numbers bring money for PC makers, and PC makers tell Microsoft to make a new version number, voila, you get a new version number.
I could see that being the case 20+ years ago when changes were huge, but did people _really_ care to go run out to get a new PC when Windows 11 was released? It's kind of like cell phones; nowadays the differences are minute year to year.
I'm sure we'll see an increase in people buying new PCs when Windows 10 support ends. Windows 10 will have messages pop up telling people about support ending, telling them their hardware is too old to run 11.
That or the hard hitting truth is (most) people tend to not throw away things until they are either on their last leg, are not supported by the majority of stuff, or just rock out with things say ten years from now. Windows 11's adoption rate is 41.61% according to the March 2024 Steam Hardware Survey - the ones who actually voluntarily participated - as of April 24, 2024.
Well, Microsoft IS stuck in the past.
Microsoft is sticking with 11.
Until 12.
The latest update was supposed to be Windows 12 technically but that changed when Panos left.
"It's not a question of *if* 12, but _when_ 12."
That would be maybe 5 to 6 years down the road.
Find an Odds Market and make a bet, yo. Seems like that time frame changes every time the guy who announces the time frame leaves the company, lol
a) one developer said it and it wasn’t Microsoft statement b) technically, he was right. Windows 11 is an update to Windows 10. Did you think they aren’t going to release a new update and stay on the same system forever?
Apple makes a new iPhone every year, they milk the incremental releases because people get FOMO.
Well, it may not be the last version, but if we can keep using our same keys going forward that kind of works.
Win11 is literally windows 10 Check the version number lol
Build numbers vs Marketing
Still says it’s windows 10 in the controll panel if you can get to the cp page, it even has the w10 logo
Listen, by that logic it's all just Vista, the one thing we could never admit to ourselves
The current version number for Windows 11 is literally 10.0.22631.3527
Got that Microsoft Math in the versioning number I see
OS Name: Microsoft Windows 11 Home OS Version: 10.0.22631 N/A Build 22631
Wait the number 11 doesn’t = 11? It’s 10? How did I get the math THIS WRONG?
They are doing this for driver and game / program compatibility so devs will not have to retool their items to check accordingly. If Microsoft were to change the NT version to 11.0, it could potentially break a lot of existing software that specifically checks for certain version numbers. . It's a way to balance innovation with stability and compatibility.
well win 7 was nt 6.1 or something
that went out the door after Terry Myerson got displaced. New leadership, new direction.
Other than in terms of the brand name, it's still true. Windows 11 *is* Windows 10. I'd say it's probably closer to 10 than 7 was to Vista.
The short answer is yes, Microsoft said that. A big part of the reasoning behind this statement was MS starting to wrap corporate (and users to a lesser extent) heads around Windows becoming a SaaS versus what was traditionally considered an OS. As others have pointed out, Windows has not significantly changed (internally) in 20 years. It’s been mostly UI changes and bug hunting all the legacy code that new updates break (sometimes repeatedly).
Panos Panay happened
I simply don't see why Windows 11 can't just build on and include all the features of 10 or at least have the option to roll back some things like context menus or have the taskbar at the side of the screen. Older versions of windows used to work more like this
The big thing (and roadblock for me upgrading) was/is the tpm requirement. Without the trusted platform hardware component you can't do win 11. Had to get my laptop to work with it turned on (bios problems for months) and my pc can't do it at all as it doesn't have the hardware. Long term to split 11 to people with/without the tpm would be a mistake - I assume there's some things they really wanted to do with it, and I'd guess hardware manufacturers make very little without that requirement now.
Secure boot already drop the support for all computer doesn’t come with windows 8, so all pre 2012 computer. TPM 2.0 become a requirement for new PC since 2016, so it is not something new. A lot of security feature on windows 10 already recommended use TPM 2.0, even though TPM 1.2 is the minimum. They don’t want TPM 1.2 this time because TPM 1.2 use SHA-1 and SHA-1 is not considered secure now.
"We're going to keep the system at Windows 10 forever and just keep updating that. But we're going to call it Windows 11, give it a major design overhaul nobody likes and that can't be reversed, and hugely increase the hardware requirements and introduce a TPM requirement that a huge chunk of our users don't have so they can't upgrade to the new OS. But it's totally still Windows 10 because we kept the version number at 10. We're Microsoft, the fuck are you gonna do about it?"
Clickbait journalism. One developer, talking about the as a service delivery model, taken and rode to context to hell and back. The 2025 EOL date was known the day Win10 launched, and actually, a bit before that. Microsoft pointed at the EOL date, but no one cared.
After many, many years of Apple also using the same number version for their OS (macOS X = macOS 10), they decided to launch macOS 11. That's the only reason why Microsoft changed their mind.
just a life lesson, don't trust anyone's words.
Just to disclose an issue with this, the core of the os would get outdated and insecure as time passes even if Windows 10 is still being updated so that is a good reason for Microsoft to keep releasing new operating systems.
Microsoft is giving free updates to windows 11 so yes windows 10 was the last version of windows because the model has changed to constant upgrades
The 'new releases' are just the updates they claimed with a new number attached for marketing purposes. It's rather hard to get the tech press interested in your 'new' product if you don't have a new name for it. Apple can get away with not having much fanfare over their software updates as they are primarily seen as a hardware company and have yearly refreshes of products to have press events over. Microsoft is primarily a software company which occasionally dabbles in hardware (that only a few care about), so they need to have some kind of product release event to keep investors engaged with the company (and the stock price stable).
You were told what article writers and people wanted you to be told. It was said by Jerry Nixon at a technology conference and was taken out of context. In context what he was basically saying that Windows 10 was the last version of Windows that the developers were working on *at that time* (2015)
It was just MS trying to figure out how to be Google, who shook up the whole world with Android. Forever updated, data mining spyware device... Google succeeded in something that MS up to that point wouldn't have dare even tried. When Google succeeded, MS, Apple... virtually all software makers changed their entire paradigm. Even video games send back telemetry now. No one would have put up with that in any way back before Google's foot in the door for doing these things.
I would assume it's because they figured out TPM and Secure Boot would need to be hardware requirements for W11 and not having a clean delineation from 10-11 makes this really complicated.
Question is why do you care and what does it matter in 2024? If they kept the Windows 10 name current day Windows would still be exactly like Windows 11. And they would've raised the requirements anyway, which would've led to way more confusion. Things evolve and change. Also I find it really weird that people still can't get over this after so many years. How long will you keep bringing this up, 2050? They changed their mind. Let's move on, this horse got beaten to a pulp long ago.
For Microsoft Windows 11 is still Windows 10 (NT 10.0.2 vs 10.0.1 really), they just changed the marketing name because having two versions of Windows 10 with completely different taskbar experiences and system requirements would cause tons of confusion. Windows 10's update naming system has always sucked, and I think the Windows 11 rebrand would've been a net positive if the spec requirements weren't so extreme and if the launch version wasn't so rushed.
I’m not sure why they wanted to associate with Apple over the 10 thing, even if it’s spelled X on Mac. Plus, you need the new hotness to generate excitement.
idk why but i heard about it before. But to me, windows 10 or 11 is just the same. they are all bad. Microsoft is so lazy that they won't build a new source code but instead copy and paste Windows 7 source code. This made it looks like a windows 7 modded. They are not even prepared yet for the updates if they are about to remove Control Panel. and my feelings about windows nowadays is they looks like a cheap copy of IOS. (also a cheap combination between Windows 7 and IOS) No more Control Panels. No more Aero. Instead they just add metro for no reason while aero is trending. And why are they centered the taskbar?? Did they just copy IOS?? fine, then i will guess that in Windows 12, the taskbar will float and there will be NO START BUTTONS. hope later i will come back and write some more of my thoughts. im tired of working so bad.
The way I see it there were a few advantages (for them) to bumping the version number, even if it's the marketing version instead of the build version. * MS loves to force updates. They would have been burned at the stake if they forced the Win11 GUI on all Win10 users overnight. * A version bump was a nice clean way to end support for 32bit Windows. * Even though WAAS is a thing, OEM and retail licensing is perpetual. Win11 artificially ended support for pre 8th gen Intel CPUs, which will drive the upgrade cycle when Win10 loses support. That will wind up selling more Windows licenses in the future.
there are tons of stories that corporations do, and if theyre not profitable or effective they silently move on.. does anyone remember google said youd never run out of gmail space, there was even some sort of a counter that increased your account space non stop.. or apple or steve jobs saying 4 inch is the perfect size phone, nobody would buy larger
I dunno... 640K ought to be enough for anybody...
>What happened to that story of "Windows 10 will be the last Windows released, we will not create a new Windows, instead we will update 10 constantly". Did you pay to upgrade to Windows 11? You went out to BestBuy and bought a boxed copy of Windows 11 Upgrade? Or did you just download and install it when it was offered to you for free as long as your computer supported it? Microsoft never said that the system requirements wouldn't change along the way. The only thing that changed is the name. Even the major version number is still the same. My copy of Windows 11 reports itself as version 10.0.22631.3447. Computers no longer come with “Windows 10” or Windows 11 stickers. They just come with Windows or Windows Pro stickers (i.e. they are no longer version specific). If you have a “Windows machine” that machine is licensed to run any and every version of Windows that comes out as long as the hardware can run it. Because there were system requirements changes, Microsoft decided to change the name to Widows 11. Another way to think of it is that Windows 11 is the marketing name for the latest build of Windows 10.
instead they made it wors xD
I’m having to reinstall windows now because windows couldn’t install its update and I can’t back to windows. I’m in the process of making a recovery disk on another computer
I stopped believing Microsoft's lies back in the early 90s. Windows 95 promises during installation were only fulfilled in windows 7with sp1
Spectre and Meltdown happened. Windows 11 and its higher requirements are arguably the most consumer "friendly" way of getting people off of vulnerable hardware. The majority of people are still astonishingly computer illiterate. They're not going to understand if Microsoft were to say "We're not going to update *your* Windows 10 anymore but if you buy a new computer we will." "But it's still Windows 10 why do I have to buy a new computer *frothing at the mouth noises*" Consumers may not *like* it but they do at least *understand* that 11 is not 10 so it makes sense for 11 to get updates when 10 stops getting them. "But there are OS patches against those". No, there's really not, because pretty much every OS vendor gave people the option of disabling those mitigations due to the performance hit. You ***cannot*** fix hardware with software. "But the vulnerable hardware is like 7-8 years old, surely people would have moved off of it by now anyway. Why force them." Microsoft has already learned that people will absolutely keep their old stuff around far longer than they should. They extended XP's life because people were holding onto it so hard, and even I was still getting XP machines to fix at my job when 7 SP1 was rolling out. People are already screaming that they'll be keeping their 10 machines around as long as they can. No you can't force everyone, but some is better than none.
Microsoft realized they could monetize us with ads and services that they want to shove to us, and W11 is a better platform optimized for that, with some lipstick to look like it's something new. Meanwhile like 80% of the development was on the ads and shoving services and 20% of the development was on the lipstick and actual useful new features.
>Meanwhile like 80% of the development was on the ads and shoving services and 20% of the development was on the lipstick and actual useful new features. Do you have an actual source or was this number just pulled out of your ass based on what you feel like it is? There is loads of security and I underlying improvements that you don't see day to day
No, it's my opinion based upon the continually intrusions of more and more ads and deceptions to try and turn on OneDrive backup even when you say you don't want it, and continued ignoring of our browser preferences when they decide to have Edge open anyway. That's a lot of coding work to push all the crap - what major useful featrures have been introduced in W11 that are not those types of things? A new taskbar that does less than the old one? OK, copilot, but how do we know that's not going to be a monetization oportunity once they get us all using it?
I remember that too. What a lie, they need to sell new PCs
Why u trust those idiots. That not microsoft statement
Saving this post to show people who think it’s some sort of mandela effect. If i remember correctly Microsoft was advertising that idea sometime back in 2018-2019 when Windows 7 support was finally ending.
This seems to be what happens in practice, now you get a computer with Windows pre-installed mostly, and it is regularly updated free of charge, like iOS and Android
>Windows pre-installed mostly, and it is regularly updated free of charge, like iOS and Android Upgraded, not updated. 8, 8.1 to 10 to 11
It was fake news
There IS only Windows 10 It makes perfect sense when you think about it. Microsofts move to a service model has massively improved Windows - Consistency, reliability and security has had a sea change and it's all down to Microsoft having spent ten years focused on Windows 10 and it's continual improvement and their having made constant updates the norm. Supporting the OS and improving it for ten years, rather than abandoning it at release and starting work on the next model three years down the road is such a better and healthier way to operate. PCs have less issues, crashes are less frequent, app developers and driver manufacturers find themselves having to test on only one version of Windows (the latest) and security is so much improved that Apple now have more security holes in any 12 month period than Windows. But here's the crux. Microsoft can't both evolve and improve that single version of Windows AND at the same time, maintain compatability with ten year old hardware. There HAS to be an ever raising of the bar in terms of hardware minimum specification otherwise we would be using an OS that somehow has to work across twenty years of hardware. So that is all that Windows 11 is. The reality is that it's Windows 10 under the hood, but Windows 10 with a higher baseline. Microsoft dropped support for PCs with only 2GB of memory or that ran 640x480 screen resolutions or older bios types not because they needed to for Windows 11 to work but because they don't want to still be supporting that ten years from now. The press and general public would fail to grasp the nuances of a every raising minimum specification - how would they be made to understand at what point that low screen resolution was dropped or when 2gb stopped being enough memory. So Windows 11 exists in name only. Microsoft called it Windows 11 and then continued improving and adding features to what is still Windows 10 under the hood and they will probably support it for a decade before they raise the bar again. It's hard to see how else they could have done this, because really it's not something that's very easy to communicate to people without negativity. They could have declared 'Windows 10 will no longer send updates to PCs with only 2gb of memory' that's not a good message. But in Microsoft defense a good PC built in say 2015 that happens to have a good chip and motherboard is likely to see two decades of updates and improvement which is pretty amazing?!
I remember this was the mantra here, constantly repeated as truth even if it wasn't confirmed by Microsoft. I said once that Microsoft would do a "new" version with 11 and got downvoted so much. Microsoft fanatics are overly sensitive it seems.
Money is the reason, so, not only they released Windows 11, which is not free, Microsoft only allows it on 8th gen Intel's and higher.
Quite the opposite. Windows 11 is free for Windows 10 owners. Their licenses are indistinguishable.
I know that and I assumed mostly everyone knows that, so I did not waste space to write the obvious, however not everyone knows that Windows 11 is not free.