• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Windows 11

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Yeah, I think "beta" covers a multitude of sins nowadays.
Click to expand...


"Beta" means you're welcome to try it out but don't come whining to us if something breaks. You're welcome to let us know about it, though.

Essentially a large scale bug testing effort as well as a dry run to see how people react to the changes.

I really don't see anything wrong with that. As complex as modern programs have become, its virtually impossible to shake them down for every possible flaw. This is a way to get as much as possible done in-house, and then let it out into the wild ... with fair warning.
 
Last edited:
quadraginta said:
"Beta" means you're welcome to try it out but don't come whining to us if something breaks. You're welcome to let us know about it, though.

Essentially a large scale bug testing effort as well as a dry run to see how people react to the changes.

I really don't see anything wrong with that. As complex as modern programs have become, its virtually impossible to shake them down for every possible flaw. This is a way to get as much as possible done in-house, and then let it out into the wild ... with fair warning.
Click to expand...

I wasn't claiming any differently.
 
Darat said:
Seems still to be there for me?
Click to expand...


I was repeating what was reported in a tech site I get newsletters from.

They are generally reliable. I might be able to find it again.

ETA: Here it is. Well, one of them, anyway.

After the new operating system was officially announced on June 24, users were able to access the PC Health Check app to check compatibility. First, users were given a hard “no” if their device wasn’t, with no explanation. Shortly after, Microsoft updated the tool to provide a brief explanation if a device wasn’t compatible.

Now, the company quietly announced it is removing the tool entirely. The statement was buried two blog posts deep in its latest “Insider Preview” blog entry for June 28. An unassuming link in that blog encouraged readers to read yet another blog post “Preparing for Insider Preview Builds of Windows 11,” which featured an update at the top with a link where readers could learn more about an “Update on Windows 11 minimum system requirements.”

Near the bottom of that blog, Microsoft states “With these minimum system requirements in mind, the PC Health Check app was intended to help people check if their current Windows 10 PC could upgrade to Windows 11. Based on the feedback so far, we acknowledge that it was not fully prepared to share the level of detail or accuracy you expected from us on why a Windows 10 PC doesn’t meet upgrade requirements. We are temporarily removing the app so that our teams can address the feedback. We will get it back online in preparation for general availability this fall.”
Click to expand...


So the source was, apparently, Microsoft.

Upon reflection, not all that reliable, I suppose.

ETA 2: Is it possible that the tool you tried is one you had resident on your machine? I still have copies on both of mine, although I haven't tried to run them again.

Perhaps it is just not available for download now.
 
Last edited:
How many desktop computers have a webcam? You need one for Windows 11 (or so says the above link).

On the other hand, it might not be a bad idea to have them as standard. Meetings are now frequently held via the internet. Plus speech to text software is becoming more common. This is in addition to their use as a password alternative.
 
quadraginta said:
I was repeating what was reported in a tech site I get newsletters from.

They are generally reliable. I might be able to find it again.

ETA: Here it is. Well, one of them, anyway.

​


So the source was, apparently, Microsoft.

Upon reflection, not all that reliable, I suppose.

ETA 2: Is it possible that the tool you tried is one you had resident on your machine? I still have copies on both of mine, although I haven't tried to run them again.

Perhaps it is just not available for download now.
Click to expand...

I was probably looking at a cached page.
 
rjh01 said:
How many desktop computers have a webcam? You need one for Windows 11 (or so says the above link).
On the other hand, it might not be a bad idea to have them as standard. Meetings are now frequently held via the internet. Plus speech to text software is becoming more common. This is in addition to their use as a password alternative.
Click to expand...

Nope - that is for laptops not desktops.
 
rjh01 said:
How many desktop computers have a webcam? You need one for Windows 11 (or so says the above link).
Click to expand...

Really? I'm definitely holding out until Windows 10 becomes obsolete, then. Maybe then I will end up on Linux, running a VM for my old programmes.

I guess it makes sense, as part of the whole "Teams is integrated into the OS" thing. There's little point having Teams if you don't have a webcam, and therefore it's the users who are wrong for not having one.

On the other hand, it might not be a bad idea to have them as standard. Meetings are now frequently held via the internet. Plus speech to text software is becoming more common. This is in addition to their use as a password alternative.
Click to expand...

All of that is stuff I do on my iPhone or iPad. I use my desktop differently to either. I have no use for a webcam on my desktop, and I'm certainly not going to buy one just so I can get a mostly aesthetic update for Windows. That's more of a dealbreaker than needing a Microsoft account would be.
 
I can understand a drive to encourage webcams - why should they be a necessary requirement for the OS? and if it is - why only laptops? Seems very odd to me, but then I am a bear of very little brain.
 
Last edited:
I like biometric security, and I like the push by both Microsoft and Apple towards a system where logging on to services other than their own will be biometric rather than username and password-based, but I'm not sure about it being a requirement. That seems a little "we know what's good for you, even if you don't" for my tastes.

And I'm not sure about a camera-only facial recognition system, either. Microsoft quotes the false positive rate as being 1 in 200,000, which isn't terrible, but is significantly higher than Face ID's 1 in 1,000,000.

There's also a part of me that wonders whether this push towards biometric security isn't going to lead to a potential problem in the future that we just haven't seen. There are definitely problems with passwords (and, thus far, all services that use biometric ID also have a password as back-up and therefore aren't actually any more secure than the password itself - if anything they're less secure because there's one more method to entry), but if your password is compromised then you change your password, whereas if someone has managed to create a way to bypass your biometric security you can't exactly get a new face. And they only have to do it once to gain access to everything.

I don't think that's anything close to being a problem at the moment, and seems geared more towards people who know you stealing a physical device you own while also having some method of bypassing your biometric ID which is not exactly a likely scenario for a vast majority of people, but it is a potential pitfall that I don't see any way around should it actually become a problem. At the moment, if someone steals my phone they can't get it and I can brick it remotely. If everything is biometric and they have some way of spoofing it then they can actually lock me out of my account so I can't brick it, and then drain my bank account, my investments, etc.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I like biometric security, and I like the push by both Microsoft and Apple towards a system where logging on to services other than their own will be biometric rather than username and password-based, but I'm not sure about it being a requirement. That seems a little "we know what's good for you, even if you don't" for my tastes.

And I'm not sure about a camera-only facial recognition system, either. Microsoft quotes the false positive rate as being 1 in 200,000, which isn't terrible, but is significantly higher than Face ID's 1 in 1,000,000.

<snip>
Click to expand...


It isn't clear to me that MS is going to demand that Win11 systems use only their Hello Windows facial recognition as the sole security. It may just be that the want the machines it is installed on to be capable of using it.

I guess we'll see.
 
quadraginta said:
It isn't clear to me that MS is going to demand that Win11 systems use only their Hello Windows facial recognition as the sole security. It may just be that the want the machines it is installed on to be capable of using it.

I guess we'll see.
Click to expand...

That's not what I meant. I mean that Microsoft seems to use normal cameras, which can only see pictures in 2D. Apple's system uses lidar, which creates a 3D model, which will therefore be more accurate and less fallible. And, indeed, the figures above suggest that Hello is 5 times more likely to turn up a false positive than Face ID is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom