Even before his arrival, Windows 11 was already surrounded by a huge controversywhich was also reinforced by the strange way Microsoft managed it. Recall that the most current version of the Redmond operating system was presented on June 24, 2021, and only a day later we already published the first special about it, which tried to clarify all the doubts that arose from the first hours.

The problem is that in the coming weeks and months We keep hearing conflicting informationand we even come across some cases where some beta versions of Windows 11 have skipped what Microsoft has stated in the official technical requirements of the operating system. And if we add that to the ever-changing list of compatible hardware (mainly processors), we already have a fairly clear idea of ​​one of the various reasons why Windows 11 started life on a pretty bad foot.

After the launch, when it started reaching the first users with compatible systems, it took very little time before workarounds (admittedly unofficial) began to appear that already allowed to bypass the requirements of Windows 11, with a special focus on compatibility with TPM 2.0which was undoubtedly a condition that left many systems unable to upgrade, which otherwise offer the necessary features for easy OS migration.

Redmond has never liked users circumventing this restriction, and as we read on XDA, Microsoft decided to toughen it up to prevent Windows 11 from being installed on systems that don’t meet the minimum requirements. Specifically, they removed the option to use the “/product server” parameter when running the installer. Why, because it forced him to skip the hardware review to confirm its compatibility.

This method of circumventing the minimum requirements has been in the works for some time, but the fact that it was official shows that even Microsoft is coming up with scenarios where some flexibility needs to be shown. And this is not the only case, you surely remember that we repeated it a few months ago some versions of Windows 11 omit these minimum requirements by default. Something that, as far as we know, allows us to skip them with just a click of the mouse, as surprising as that may seem.

Personally, I think that there is nothing to object to the policy of Microsoft, which tries to make the use of its operating system as safe as possible, and even I understand that you intend to implement this in certain environments such as enterprises (although I also think it should ultimately depend on the technical person responsible for the infrastructure). However, such a restrictive policy applied to the domestic market seems to me to be a mistake.