Submitted by They hid it very well, two-thirds down a long list of changes and screenshots, but what was already inevitable is now reality.
Similar to Windows 11 Home edition, Windows 11 Pro edition now requires internet connectivity during the initial device setup (OOBE) only. If you choose to setup device for personal use, MSA will be required for setup as well. You can expect Microsoft Account to be required in subsequent WIP flights.
In other words, installing Windows 11 Pro will now, just like 11 Home, also require a Microsoft Account and thus an internet connection. You didn’t think pro users would be safe from big tech’s data hunger, now, did you?
I fully switched to Linux when MS started pushing upgrades to W10 and I never looked back.
But I have to say that Valve really made it easier to stay on this side.
Nowadays Linux gaming is starting to be easier and more frictionless than on Windows. Starting with Valve Deck and, in the future, in ChromeOS devices. It might not be the “Year of Linux on the Desktop” as we once hoped for, but that’s fine.
Here’s hoping that in 10 more years we’ll be able to game on HaikuOS, haha.
I made the switch to Linux more than tens years ago. I bought a new Dell in January and had intended to leave Windows on it as a triple boot, it’s easier to deal with the supplier if Windows is still installed.
When I found the requirement for a Microsoft account I completely wiped Windows from the disk.
It could be said I just threw away the “benefits” of paying the Microsoft tax, but as the discount I got was good I’m not bothered.
What kind of distro you’d advice to use as a Windows replacement ? I mean for daily use (browsing and media, hence codecs), gaming (hence 3d drivers) and development (hence virtualization) ? From what I understand, Linux gets more and more picky about hardware requirement to achieve all of this smoothly.
Kochise,
Most distros are more or less built from the same kernel. So don’t go distro hopping too much for hardware compatibility. Pick the distro you like and stick to hardware that’s known to be well supported. I’d recommend starting with beginner distros like mint or ubuntu. When I started out I tried dozens and to be honest I was too inexperienced to choose between them.
Hardware wise, nvidia’s proprietary video drivers are a con and you could face trouble if you go that route (just like I do). Kernel updates can and will break graphics drivers. This is the byproduct of kernel developers who refuse to support an ABI plus manufacturers who refuse to provide open source drivers. Both parties deserve to be criticized over this. This is one of the great divisions in the linux community as you are no doubt familiar.
People get disappointed when their windows games won’t work under linux. And although that is is understandable, I think it’s a mistake for people to go in with the expectation that windows titles will work at all…assume they will not work. If they do it will be a happy surprise. The growing set of officially supported linux native and wine/proton titles really do support graphics acceleration just fine in linux.
Regarding virtualization, to be honest I don’t ever recall having an issue with virtualization. KVM has always just worked for me, but if you are looking for a user friendly GUI interface then installing virtualbox for linux gives you an experience that’s identical to the windows version. Keep in mind that only one driver can use virtual cpu extensions at a time.
On the off chance that you are looking for virtual graphics acceleration to run windows games, again it’s probably not going to work as well as you like. To my knowledge no consumer grade graphics cards support virtualization in hardware and as far as I know software based GPU virtualization is still too immature and slow (though anyone who knows otherwise feel free to correct me!). People have gotten PCI pass-through working with a 2nd graphics card. Clearly this isn’t always ideal or practical, but it will eliminate all the overhead of virtual graphics hardware.
https://docs.oracle.com/en/virtualization/virtualbox/6.0/admin/pcipassthrough.html
I was thinking about Qubes on Asus GX650 (Ryzen 6000)
I don’t want to lessen my hardware expectations because in 2022 people still cannot stick their nose out of their own ass.
Show me Desktop Linux is a worthwhile contender, stop this childish behaviour of yours !
Kochise,
What on earth are you talking about? I was giving serious and thoughtful advice given your questions, Many of us do use linux as a daily driver and it’s based on this experience that we can recommend it’s use or not for specific use cases. Ultimately it’s your prerogative to do what you want and I support your freedom to do so, but seriously if you weren’t going to be open to reasonable answers then why did you even ask?
Wasn’t speaking about you, don’t worry. More about the “This is the byproduct of kernel developers who refuse to support an ABI plus manufacturers who refuse to provide open source drivers.”
I don’t want to have to select the suitable hardware to fit the software’s limitations. There are already so many Linux packages lagging behind because maintainers are lazy or just throw the towel.
Kochise,
I kind of took the “stop this childish behaviour of yours !” to refer to me personally given the lack of additional context. Oh well, haha. I do wish we in the linux community could be more pragmatic at times. Some people vehemently oppose stable ABIs even though the lack of stability causes problems for others. End users don’t really get a say on the issue. I try to consciously take a balanced approach but it usually results in me getting stuck in the middle of a fight where everyone wants to point the finger at someone else. I’m pretty confident these issues will *not* get resolved due to the stubbornness of all parties involved, so for better or worse you have to choose your hardware accordingly to get the best linux experience.
Hardware with open source drivers is always preferable, but if nvidia hardware is what you have the reverse engineered nouveaux drivers should be usable for most users. They don’t have all the features and performance of nvidia’s proprietary drivers though. Personally I’m stuck with the proprietary drivers because I want cuda, so I deal with the associated problems even though I won’t recommend it to others for obvious reasons.
I’ve had good experience with onboard intel GPUs, it just works. Just don’t expect stellar performance out of the iGPU. The last ATI/AMD GPU I had worked but it was a long time ago so I would defer to others on that.
Probably the easiest to start is a WIMP (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) GUI desktop that will work much like Windows does, to ease the transition. Distributions based on Debian (Like Xubuntu) have an extensive and solid set of applications available and a large user base to provide expertise when needed.
Xubuntu is a good choice, especially on an older system since it has a very lightweight GUI. There’s lots of forums and wikis available for virtually any issue. It should meet your needs as described.
Ubuntu, and the LTS. (not even the flavors, they don’t have the same level of support and polish as the mothership)
A OS is a lot more than just a desktop that looks familiar. The user must have access to tutorials to solve issues that he has along the way (plenty for ubuntu), proprietary companies that release software that he uses must support the distribution (ubuntu support among proprietary software suppliers that has Linux versions is universal), a stable base that stays the same for a reasonable period of time without getting stale, and support from hardware manufacturers with their binary blobs…
And I’m a Gentoo user. But pushing a user that has zero interest to anything else than a plug&play machine thru pain and suffering just to defend “my feud” is the wrong mentality.
Well I’ve just switched from Lubuntu to Devuan as my daily but I would never recommend that to anyone unless, like me, they love to tinker.
When any one I know seriously asks I’ll set them up with an Ubuntu or Mint system usually with Mate desktop if they have an older system. With a bit of initial hand holding they have all made the transition without too many problems so far. All they want are a browser, email and media player, something every OS seems capable of these days.
I can’t comment on gaming because that’s not my thing.
I tend to buy computers with AMD cpu/gpu and they just seem to work fine.
The only difficulty I’ve had recently was setting up a scanner which can be a bit tricky, I’d probably be quicker just taking a photo and transferring it from the camera to laptop.
My 44c/88t 256gb ram can not even run win 11 if i even wanted to. Good riddance.
I have to wonder if any of the people complaining about this also have refused free Google, FB, Paypal, Ebay, Twitter, Instagram, Tik Tok or Amazon accounts. Not to mention the plethora of “free” accounts you need on the developer side of the user space, I suppose they will use their free accounts to complain about it on Reddit or perhaps even OS News, maybe even saving a draft or two on Git Hub before moving on to play some online gaming using a free account at …………………… !
So the complaints of being forced to register via a free account seem somewhat arbitrary.
cpcf,
I don’t really understand your point. Windows is an operating system that you install on your machine, whereas google/facebook/paypal/ebay are all websites you use for online services. Plenty of people refuse to use those services BTW, And windows is not free. I realize this is where the industry is at now, but I would say it is problematic that we have a monopoly forcing consumers to create accounts they really don’t want or need (aside from being forced to do it to use their computers).
This is along the same level as my annoyance that for Android phones you need a google account (or a Samsung one as well if you use one of their phones). There isn’t even really a way to skip such things unless you use a custom ROM. Apple is the same way, though you could feasibly use your macbook without one, you mostly still need one for most software these days… Windows is just in the ‘I want some of that money too!’ which is silly.
leech,
I’m no fan of that either and I hate that so many apps are exclusive to the app store monopolies because authors have given in and won’t make them available anywhere else. And then there’s bootlocks that deny us from using alternative ROMs. It’s all setup to make independent competition fail.
Microsoft has long been jealous of the walled garden. Both microsoft and apple want to bring mobile restrictions to the desktop and they’ve been wearing down reluctant users with more roadblocks and hoops. Surely their end goal is to make us all accustomed to being tethered. Obviously many of us don’t want computers embracing the restrictions of mobile. Regardless, if they achieve a critical mass on desktops, the network effects will make it much harder to escape.
I specifically bought an Android phone which doesn’t need such things, it’s optional.
Fairphone ?
Yes, Fairphone.
Not perfect solution, but a good start.
Same, FP4, but still have to have a gmail account to access the Playstore. But at least the phone ain’t ridden with crapwares. It’s almost pure AOSP.
/e/OS on Fairphone is an option if you need even more separation from Google.
You can even buy it pre-installed
You are comparing a desktop OS with internet services. Apples and Oranges.
And yes, on smartphones (a more valid comparison) you are also required to have these accounts (usually), unfortunately. But everybody doing wrong is not a valid excuse to do wrong too.
BTW, this rises a interesting trivia: MacOS don’t require a Apple ID, last time that I checked at least.
The great irony about the constant complaining about Windows telemetry is that the same people most certainly give the exact same data to Google through their Android keyboard.
dark2,
Speaking only for myself, but I protest both.
Are we certain this is for all Windows 11 Pro installs going forward? The ‘WIP’ qualifier in, “you can expect Microsoft Account to be required in subsequent WIP flights,” section makes it sound like this only applies to Insider Previews, not stable variants of Windows.
Odds are that it will come to pass in the Release channel, but there is a small chance they will backpedal given enough pushback. The problem is that by and large, anyone using Insider Previews is already required to use a Microsoft account anyway for bug reporting and other interactions with the Windows development apparatus, so they won’t care about this anti-feature.
I think it’s going to end up in Release soon, and it will take a huge public backlash for Microsoft to reverse it. Given the overwhelming majority of Windows users are on the Home edition that came with their PC, combined with the fact that any business with enough clout to make a public outcry doesn’t care because they use Domain Join via AD DS, I’d be extremely surprised if it doesn’t stick around for good.
As long as that domain join option is available, you can make a local account. You have to do that anyway before you can join ADDS. Create the local account and then just don’t join any domain.
Now, if they’re removing that option… well, that’s a whole other annoyance factor especially if they’re going to try and require Azure instead of ADDS (wouldn’t put it past them). Before going into hysterics, let’s see what actually is going to happen.
And for all the blah blah switch to Linux army that seems to populate most tech forums, people might be more willing to do that if their apps ran on it. Note I said their apps, not your alternative apps.
darknexus,
People have found ways to bypass the online account requirements in some of the early releases…
https://www.askvg.com/tip-how-to-install-windows-11-with-local-user-account/
Some of these are pretty clever, but ultimately microsoft could end up “fixing” all the ways that allow a local user account during install. They could even remove the local path from the installer all together so it doesn’t even exist.
I feel this narrative has become a straw man: people complaining about linux zealotry even when nobody was being a linux zealot. Some of us prefer linux, some of us prefer windows, and some of us prefer both in different contexts. They’re just tools for people with different needs, so who cares. Let’s not drag computer operating systems into religious turf battles! Yes, I know it’s way too late for that, but it is what I think every time I see someone complaining about someone else’s OS preferences.
> people complaining about linux zealotry even when nobody was being a linux zealot.
Hear hear !
So, if you want to go to Windows 11, it pays to wait for Windows 11 LTSC (bought via grey-market key shops, because Microsoft apparently neither wants nor deserves your money).
How long before we get a MSA server emulator to bypass this.
They already did it for activation.
jmorgannz,
Did they? I wasn’t able to find much information on this. It’s one thing if a client side patch is used to modify the OS activation, but faking an authentication server means either microsoft got the crypto really wrong or the keys were stolen.
In theory authentication based on public key cryptography should remain secure so long as the cryptographic primitives themselves aren’t broken. In practice the weakest link tends to be the client OS. However with the new TPM requirement things may be a bit different because the authentication may take place between microsoft servers and the TPM chip.
My worry is still, mandatory secure boot on PC or similar is next.
Lennie,
There are a lot of threats to open computing that I worry about too. I’ve already bought a laptop where this was the case and I could not disable it. For now it seems to be the exception rather than the norm though. I think one of the reasons it hasn’t been mandated as a windows requirement on x86 (yet) is because microsoft may expect it would trigger a new antitrust proceeding, but they may find a way to make it happen. Then every operating system would have to get microsoft and/or manufacturer approval before an owner would even have the right to install it. Mandatory secure boot is essentially a walled garden for operating systems. It would be very regressive if alt-OS were to become as challenging on x86 as it is on ARM.
requite -> require
Would the Enterprise edition also be affected?
Also I love how this guy reacts…
https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-moving-away.html
The reality is Windows is moving towards “subscription model”. Hence in the future by saying you use Windows what you will actually be saying is i use “Netflix”. That is i pay Microsoft a fee to play games, watch videos, use office suite, use GitHub, Microsoft Teams … For that you will need “an account” to basically authenticate yourself and get access. The same can be said for Chrome OS. It’s like with the access to the Internet these days. By using a client, such as Firefox or Chrome, you basically agree to the terms of usage. That is to pay for the access and usage with your privacy. Currently there is hence no “online account” to access the Internet. But that is because it’s in general an opt-out option without the actual checkbox to opt-out. Now on believing people will switch to Linux to do something about that. They won’t. Not because there is anything wrong with Linux on desktop. It’s just in the nature of people to do that. That is lets say in general to choose Chrome over Firefox, to choose Chrome OS over Debian … Likely it has something to do with fear of missing out and in general a drug like addiction. That is big IT companies realized if you add the “sugar” consumption will increase and people in general will come back for more. This are nasty things to fight in real life. Drug addictions. On the internet it’s harder because this isn’t even acknowledged yet. Let alone anybody doing something about it. Some sort of a status quo situation is established where the debates usually end at somebody saying i am moving to Linux to save the world and somebody else saying but what about the drivers. Or something like that. I agree that Linux on desktop is not a solution for this problem. Just like Firefox is not a solution for a more private access to the internet. People in general just won’t choose it and will rather opt-in for Chrome, Windows, Netflix … Firefox proved that if you don’t have to pay anything for it and the product is on the same level as the competition. Majority will still opt-in for Chrome. Debates about Linux on desktop are hence silly and unfounded. The real problems are not getting addressed. Hence no real change is possible.
Damn you’re an “optimist” but I cannot deny those facts. Yes, the real problem is humanity itself. Also it’s a well-known pattern that new technologies get used by a small elitist group (much freedom, not much regulation, much creativity but not much stability and not user-friendly); then a few businesses will transform such technology for mass consumption. The masses and and also businesses will ask for more control, “safety”, regulation and so on.
All the more reason that various alternatives need to make it easier to install/use for the average user. I imagine many here can manage installing Linux/BSD/etc on desktops/laptops and GrapheneOS on a Pixel phone. But, if the average user could do so with a nice little wizard (w/o too many steps), AND they saw the value in doing so, we might see a critical mass away from such things.
Secureboot ? TPM2.0 ?
Ubuntu is easier to install than Windows, especially if you count in that for Windows, you have to install basic applications afterwards. People are just too lazy to bother.
I don’t think it’s laziness, mostly it’s either lack of technical knowhow or simply moving from windows requires to many compromises. For example Linux gaming has certainly got better, but on Windows I get All the games… And better drivers for my hardware…