Preparing for Insider Preview Builds of Windows 11 - ***UPDATED 6/28***

Anonymous
2021-06-24T16:00:22+00:00

Hello Windows Insiders! Today we announced Windows 11, and we know you are excited to get your hands on it. You can check out all the details on how to prepare for Windows 11 Insider Preview builds on our blog post.

Once you've reviewed the blog, please use this post to ask any related questions you may have.

We are excited to hear your feedback!!

-The Windows Insider Team

***UPDATE***

For users who are receiving the following message in your Windows Insider Settings:

Your PC does not meet the minimum hardware requirements for Windows 11. Your device may continue to receive Insider Preview builds until Windows 11 is generally available, at which time it is recommended to clean install to Windows 10.

We've made an update to Settings to resolve some issues. Please reboot your device to ensure you have the latest update.

Windows Insider program | Windows Insider preview | Install, activate, and Windows update

Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.

0 comments No comments

2,500 answers

Sort by: Oldest
  1. Anonymous
    2021-07-10T04:10:24+00:00

    Hi so I have a Lenovo and I am not sure how to get the windows 11 update my laptop says this

    Your PC does not meet the minimum hardware requirements recommend for Windows 11 and there may be issues and bugs that impact your experience.

    So it says that and I really want the Windows 11 so what should I do?

    Was this answer helpful?

    2 people found this answer helpful.
    0 comments No comments
  2. Anonymous
    2021-07-10T05:46:15+00:00

    win 11 denemek istiyorum

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments No comments
  3. Deleted

    This answer has been deleted due to a violation of our Code of Conduct. The answer was manually reported or identified through automated detection before action was taken. Please refer to our Code of Conduct for more information.


    Comments have been turned off. Learn more

  4. Anonymous
    2021-07-10T07:21:21+00:00

    it was realy helpful thank you

    all the best.......

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments No comments
  5. Anonymous
    2021-07-10T07:37:54+00:00

    I've read in a comment that "the BIOS cannot clear the TPM, windows must do it".

    Does it mean that the UEFI keys loaded by the UEFI BIOS are not suitable, and Windows attempts to provision the TPM with ITS OWN keys, that it computes entirely itself?

    This does not look being compliant to TCG specs !!!

    And where can we find the keys (or certifificates) that Windows want to use (notably the EK)?

    Are our UEFI BIOS provisioning the TPM2 chip with keys that Windows does not accept, simply because the OEM "default" keys provided by the UEFI BIOS are not known by Microsoft, which requires these keys to be submitted by the manufacturer to the WHQL labs startign in 2017?

    Note that my UEFI BIOS is from February 2017 (si it should pass the date limit).

    It is normal that Windows cannot load its own "EK", because it is strongly protected by the BIOS. So Windows wants to take the FULL ownership of the TPM. If this is true, this is a CLEAR VIOLATION of the TCG specs, and even ILLEGAL!

    Such action may work with "fTPM" (firmware TPM) like those embedded in recent generations of CPUs, but will NEVER work with *normal* "dTPM" (discrete TPM), that any organization will want to own themselves or will want to provision with their own keys signed by their own certificates.

    I've attempted to clear the TPM in Windows (with "TPM.MSC"), it does not work, I still have the TPM provisioned by the default keys of the UEFI BIOS, and it seems very normal that Windows fails to replace them after that during the UEFI preboot.

    All this would then demonstrate that Windows 11 VIOLATES standards, and international laws protecting our own assets, and our own privacy. Microsoft is just attempting to STEAL our own machines in order to STEAL our own data (and then not respect any privacy choice). Windows 11 is then absolutely NOT secure. It is MUCH WORSE in terms of security than Windows 7/8/8.110 and all versions of Windows Server including Windows Server 2019.

    How can we submit to the WHQL labs our own ADK profiles and get a counter-signature by Microsoft that our UEFI BIOS is TCG-compliant after that Microsoft has verified our Windows licence to get this endorsement ? It seems that for now it is not possible, or the required tool is simply not available (or its initial tests have still not passed the TCG tests and TCG rejected the Microsoft request to the TCG).

    The requirement to use "recent generation of CPU" is jsut that they embed the WEAK "fTPM", not a true (discrete) TPM (even on motherboards that accept these recent CPUs, and provide *both* the support for a **hardware** "dTPM", and like the firmware/sofware "fTPM" like "Intel PTT or vPro" (to be used ONLY as a fallback solution when there's no "dTPM" plugged on the motherboard).

    So users using the STRONGEST TPM2 (with a dTPM) are excluded.

    If all this is true, then Windows 11 is then a demonstrated MALWARE !!! Microsoft you've LIED to us publicly ! Windows 11 is absolutely NOT made to increase outr security, it is just made to STEAL out PC and all our data when it wants, if:

    * you use those recent generations of CPU embedding the weak dTPM, and

    * you do not use (or do not want to enable) a strong dTPM fully compliant to TCG PM2.0 and fully supported by the EUFI BIOS.

    Final note: clearing the TPM from Windows or from the UEFI BIOS was equivalent in Windows 8/8.1/10, and is still equivalent in windows Server 2019: it worked perfectly, and in fact all was done by the UEFI BIOS, with a "require physical human presence" check. Now in the Windows 11 UEFI bootloader, clearing the TPM (with "TPM.MSC") no longer works because it does not request the "physical human presence" and such clearing attempt is then correctly rejected by the BIOS (as it MUST do when the instanned discrete TPM is already owned and sealed by this BIOS protection). Microsoft is attempting to bypass a STRONG security required by TCG (and effectively the UEFI BIOS doing that ARE fully compliant to the TCG standard that Microsoft wants to violate, by acting exactly like what malwares would attempt to do).

    Conclusion: latest generations of CPU implementing a "fTPM" are NOT secure. You DO NOT need them and in fact you should use them ONLY if you have a real dTPM plugged on your motherboard. But Microsoft does not want us to do that, and violates our legal rights ! And it is very symptomatic that Microsoft does not want to explicit us why our PC are "not compatible" with Windows 11: search everywhere, there's NO detail, no log, nothing to justify the Microsoft position:

    Microsoft is VOLUNTARILY HIDING us the truth about Windows 11 (that this is absolutely not based on technical reasons, but a commercial desire by Microsoft and a HIDDEN SECRET commercial arrangement with some Chinese manufacturers, so that they will sell costly new hardwares but with WEAKER base security, and in exchange those manufacturers will buy to Microsoft lot of new Windows licences to embed in their BIOS) !

    And even customers today that are buying NEW PCs, may not be "eligible" to Windows 11, simply because their PC is not in the abusively restricted list of manufacturers and PC models that do not participate to the SECRET (and ILLEGAL!) arrangement made by Microsoft China with Chinese PC manufacturers.

    It seems that Microsoft violated the US law as well (including existing bans of some products made in China, like what was applied in US against Huawei for 5G telephony) and allowed China to spy on us and decide on everything in Windows 11 ! Why doesn't the NSA investigate against Microsoft ? Will the EU sanction Microsoft ? Won't Microsoft have to pay BILLIONS dollars or Euros for this ABUSE and organized crime ? Will there be a decision to BAN Microsoft, or to force it to be splitted (with the US antitrust law), so that it forcibly separates Microsoft China (renamed) from Microsoft Corp ? Or separate Microsoft EU from Microsoft Corp as well by a EU sanction? And Russia could as well take the same sanction against Microsoft.

    Clearly Microsoft, you've lost the trust of the world ! May be it's time for Microsoft Corp to be seized by the US, and then dismantled and sold in several parts to Google, IBM, Oracle, RedHat, vmWare, Citrix, Amazon or Apple in US, or Huawei in China, or Samsung in Korea, or Sony in Japan ! And finally Windows will become an independant standard no longer controled by a single company and everyone will be happy: Windows will be fully opensourced like Linux, or integrable as a Linux-based or Android-based or iOS-based subsystem (supported by a standard API sponsored by independant international standard bodies, like IEEE, ITU, Unicode, or by opensource foundations).

    For me Windows 11 marks the end of the Microsoft dangerous adventure with Hyper-V. It's high time to replace it with other hypervisors. Windows will have to live correctly and be compatible with industry standards for hypervisors (notably with vmWare or Oracle VirtualBox) that respect the TCG standard and international laws, with FAIR competition between providers implementing these standards (and no more anticompetitive abuses and abusive hidden secret arrangements).

    I have serious doubts that Windows 11 will be made commercially released at fall 2021. Most probably, all the announced plans on June 24 are FAKE. Windows11 will be a failure before its start. Another version (Windows 12?) will be developed, and probably different versions in US, UK, EU/EEA, China, Russia, Japan, Korea, and the rest of the world, each one released (much later) by separate companies (no longer controled by Microsoft Corp, except possibly one branch and exclusively in US, and competing with other US companies).

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments No comments