this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
417 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

75205 readers
2963 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Should OS makers, like Microsoft, be legally required to provide 15 years of security updates?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

15 years is too long, it doesn't match the state of the industry or technological progress.

If anything this slows down innovation which leads me to suspect the 15 year idea was though of by someone who dislikes any technical changes.

[–] golli@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 hours ago

Or an established player in the market that wants to keep competitors out (but I guess in a way that is someone who dislikes change). While legislation like this can sometimes be great (e.g. the recent changes forcing longer support for mobile phones) there comes a point where it cuts the other way and it becomes an entry barrier.

Imo the better solution would be to legislate what happens after support ends. Like forcing the disclosure of at least some documentation that allows others to continue servicing the product or at least transfer out data and install other software on the device.

[–] Rednax@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

Before Microsoft demanded TPM 2.0, you could install the latest version of Windows on extremely old hardware. Easily reaching that 15 years. We had this already. And Windows 11 can easily run without TPM 2.0. Microsoft just has business reasons to demand it. So I don't see how innovation is slowed down by this.

[–] Highlandcow@feddit.uk 1 points 4 hours ago

Fair like imagine if Microsoft was forced to support windows 8 for 15 years, a operating system people barely use, also some OSs arnt ran by huge companys