To me it even sounds kind of scary. If they are telling users you need to switch your OS to continue using our app, that is going to isolate users and further decrease user base and market share. And apps that no one uses usually die. So for people who like Firefox, it doesn’t sound so nice. I’m also a Linux user, but I’m not sure if this is a positive way to drive users to Linux. (Thought it does mention windows 10 upgrade hardware requirement limitations, which might be a positive way to drive users to Linux, thanks Microsoft.)
Yes. What’s also true is that sometimes they must be. You will disagree until you find the exception.
There’s nothing great about companies dropping support and also keeping the code in-house so we can’t contract out improvements and fixes, but unless we change that we’re stuck in a world where ridiculously expensive hardware either needs an old OS or becomes astoundingly expensive e-waste. And yes, it needs to connect sometimes. And yes, that’s a scary as shit.
Yes. What’s also true is that sometimes they must be. You will disagree until you find the exception.
No, there should never be any reason to connect these versions to the internet.
If you are talking about legacy software in a corporate setting, then a vm should do the trick 99% of the time. If that legacy software needs an internet connection (which is already questionable), then you bridge only the specific port it needs to the connected interface. If that doesn’t work either, then you get a separate PC explicitly for that software and disallow pretty much all other connections.
If you are talking about private use, then the only thing keeping you on a windows version older than 10 is your unwillingness to upgrade. Its understandable, but it doesn’t change the fact that these versions have massive security holes and shouldn’t be used anymore.
What a bad take.
Are you really asking Mozilla to restart supporting Windows XP as well because the web browser is used for some embedded application, too?
And so what?
If the user liked Firefox, they will need to switch the OS anyway. Doesnt matter if Apple, MS or Linux. Firefox is present in all them.
man I’m facing either needing to get a new pc in THIS market to use 10, or find an entire new professional software workflow to do my job. professional video on Linux isn’t real. hobbysist video sure, but pro video work with partners just isn’t realistic on linux.
this is the first thing that’s actually pushing me hard.
i did mean 11, My pc is plenty powerful it just doesn’t happen to include a tpm chip. i have no issues with power. it handles 4k 120p 10 bit timelines fine. upgrading right now in this market would be asinine if software wasn’t pushing me into 11.
There are plenty of very powerful machines that can’t run win11 because they don’t have TPM2.0. It has nothing to do with their specs being unable to run the OS. It’s a scam by Microsoft to force people to upgrade
TPM is built into every 8th Gen. Intel and Ryzen 2000/3000 series CPUs.
7th Gen. and older machines are pretty dire by modern standards unless you had a top of the line i7, or an HEDT equivalent (did they still make those then?). 1st Gen. Ryzen suuucks for single core performance, but for video editing it’s probably ok. But you’d have to pick your codecs carefully. Even modern CPUs chug with certain codecs.
I don’t think they were talking about firefox. I think they were just complaining in general. The bit about needing to buy new equipment is what gives it away that they’re talking about not having TPM2.0.
Edit: Just saw that they confirmed my guess under a different response to me.
To me it even sounds kind of scary. If they are telling users you need to switch your OS to continue using our app, that is going to isolate users and further decrease user base and market share. And apps that no one uses usually die. So for people who like Firefox, it doesn’t sound so nice. I’m also a Linux user, but I’m not sure if this is a positive way to drive users to Linux. (Thought it does mention windows 10 upgrade hardware requirement limitations, which might be a positive way to drive users to Linux, thanks Microsoft.)
Those versions of windows haven’t had support for years. They shouldn’t even be connected to the internet.
Yes. What’s also true is that sometimes they must be. You will disagree until you find the exception.
There’s nothing great about companies dropping support and also keeping the code in-house so we can’t contract out improvements and fixes, but unless we change that we’re stuck in a world where ridiculously expensive hardware either needs an old OS or becomes astoundingly expensive e-waste. And yes, it needs to connect sometimes. And yes, that’s a scary as shit.
No, there should never be any reason to connect these versions to the internet.
If you are talking about legacy software in a corporate setting, then a vm should do the trick 99% of the time. If that legacy software needs an internet connection (which is already questionable), then you bridge only the specific port it needs to the connected interface. If that doesn’t work either, then you get a separate PC explicitly for that software and disallow pretty much all other connections.
If you are talking about private use, then the only thing keeping you on a windows version older than 10 is your unwillingness to upgrade. Its understandable, but it doesn’t change the fact that these versions have massive security holes and shouldn’t be used anymore.
Welcome… to the real world.
Half od my customers still use Win 7, a few on XP, some on8 for some reason, most on 10.
Then there’s maybe 10% on linux.
Most industries are adverse to change and if you can just patch and continue then fine, especially if you don’t need internet like with a POS.
If you don’t need the internet then why would you care about not having the latest Firefox?
It’s fine to use old unsupported OSes as long as they’re isolated from other machines and cannot access the outside world (and you’re careful).
But nobody should be unironically using Firefox on windows 7. Windows 7 has been EOL for over half a decade at this point.
What a bad take.
Are you really asking Mozilla to restart supporting Windows XP as well because the web browser is used for some embedded application, too?
And so what?
If the user liked Firefox, they will need to switch the OS anyway. Doesnt matter if Apple, MS or Linux. Firefox is present in all them.
man I’m facing either needing to get a new pc in THIS market to use 10, or find an entire new professional software workflow to do my job. professional video on Linux isn’t real. hobbysist video sure, but pro video work with partners just isn’t realistic on linux.
this is the first thing that’s actually pushing me hard.
How the hell are you editing video on a PC that can’t even support Windows 10?
I’m fairly certain they meant 11.
Even if it’s windows 11 that they meant then what are they doing professionally that runs at acceptable speeds?
If this is actually for work where you get paid money you’d probably be better off financing a new computer and doubling your output.
i did mean 11, My pc is plenty powerful it just doesn’t happen to include a tpm chip. i have no issues with power. it handles 4k 120p 10 bit timelines fine. upgrading right now in this market would be asinine if software wasn’t pushing me into 11.
There are plenty of very powerful machines that can’t run win11 because they don’t have TPM2.0. It has nothing to do with their specs being unable to run the OS. It’s a scam by Microsoft to force people to upgrade
TPM is built into every 8th Gen. Intel and Ryzen 2000/3000 series CPUs.
7th Gen. and older machines are pretty dire by modern standards unless you had a top of the line i7, or an HEDT equivalent (did they still make those then?). 1st Gen. Ryzen suuucks for single core performance, but for video editing it’s probably ok. But you’d have to pick your codecs carefully. Even modern CPUs chug with certain codecs.
That doesn’t make any sense, though. Firefox still supports Windows 10. It’s just support for 7 and 8 that’s ending.
I don’t think they were talking about firefox. I think they were just complaining in general. The bit about needing to buy new equipment is what gives it away that they’re talking about not having TPM2.0.
Edit: Just saw that they confirmed my guess under a different response to me.
Yoy are doing professional video work on a PC old enough that it can’t run Windows 10?
Market share for Win 7-8.1 is, no joke, 0.69% (nice). And how many of those users are running FireFox?
Seems in line with what Mozilla’s board of <insert pun that rhymes with directors here 'cos i’m tired> has been doing for ages, so yeah.
But windoze 10 or 11 are different operating systems then windows 7 or 8.