this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
389 points (99.2% liked)

Linux

6515 readers
746 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] easily3667@lemmus.org -3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The technical requirements for 11 were reasonable when it came out and even more so today. Laptops being ewaste when they were built that way isn't Microsoft's fault.

[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The technical requirements for 11 were reasonable

My 8700k (from 2018) disagrees.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

They're the ones that keep making the requirements more and more unreasonable with every update.

[–] easily3667@lemmus.org 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

What is unreasonable about 4 gb of ram, a processor made in the last decade, and a tpm chip? Even Linux doesn't run well under 8, let alone 4, because linux's memory management and handling of low memory is a catastrophic embarrassment. (Yes it uses less idle, but you get to 80% and the system will lock up)

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Linux runs just fine in 4. Or much less. It depends a lot on what you use it for. My 486 had a whooping 32 Megs of memory and ran Linux just fine.

Regarding MS, the main problem is the changing of the goalpost. And I'm not so sure there's even any point to the whole TPM thing anyway.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 12 hours ago

The TPM chip is the issue here, and not a requirement under Linux.