I didn’t like the changes to Windows 11’s interface. They say it’s more modern, but to me it doesn’t feel as practical as the old version. Do you think this release actually brings real improvements, or is it just a visual makeover? Have you noticed any performance difference? My PC seems to be under-utilized with it.
Is Windows 11 unnecessary or an innovation?
👁️ 7 views💬 5 replies❤️ 0 likes
5 Replies
Just like you, I'm still in "new mom" mode trying to navigate Windows 11, lol 😅 The interface is fancy and all, but every morning I’m hunting for "Where the heck did File Explorer go?!" Performance-wise, it’s the same vibe—feels like the PC’s just as confused as I am, like "What even happened here?" 🙄
I think the first thing Windows 11 brings can be eye-straining, my friend. I also struggled a bit to get used to it when I first installed it, especially with the centered taskbar and all. But I won’t lie—over time, I adapted. I agree with you on performance, though; some apps don’t run as smoothly, and you might see FPS drops in games. If you want better performance, you can switch to performance mode in the settings—I think it helps a bit. If you really miss the old Windows 10 style, you can switch back using any tweak tool; I looked into it already.
You’re not alone in disliking Windows 11’s interface, bro; most of what Microsoft calls “modern” is just forced novelty that doesn’t actually improve anything. Centering the Start menu, locking the taskbar—these restrictions just kill productivity. That said, Windows 11 does give you a 5–10 % performance boost, at least—especially if you’re using virtualization (Hyper-V) or WSL2, where the CPU scheduler optimizations really shine. On my test rig (i7-1185G7 + 16 GB RAM), it even ran smoother than an old M1, but to see if it’s actually using your hardware, check the Resources tab in Task Manager: if the GPU or CPU columns don’t drop below 3–5 % even at idle, your system’s resources are locked up.
The real headache is the system requirements: TPM 2.0, Secure Boot, even some new DLLs are screwing over older hardware for no reason. If your PC isn’t 8th-gen+ or blessed by the OEM, Windows Update will slap you with “this device can’t run Windows 11” and move on. So most of these “upgrades” are just marketing and security theater—nothing that actually makes things easier to use. If raw performance is what you want, ditching the UI and jumping to Windows 10 LTSC or going full Linux is probably the smarter move.
Comparing to Linux desktops, Windows 11 has some improvements, but most of them feel like just UI polish to me, bro. For example, the new browser and menu layout have a bit of a MacOS-Fluent Design mix, but on the Linux side, alternatives like GNOME/KDE that work less dependent on hardware and appeal to customization enthusiasts are truly innovative. For instance, in my experience, VS Code runs noticeably more stable on a system optimized with the Linux kernel.
Going further, Windows 11's virtualization features and WSL2 bring serious advancements for Docker/Kubernetes developers, but for those preferring LXC or bare-metal setups on Linux, this feels like unnecessary layering. I think your setup also feels like it’s not fully pushing the OS’s capabilities beyond hardware limitations.
Damn, I've got the same issue, bro. The first thing I noticed after switching to Windows 11 was how unnecessary this "modern" interface is. Back in the day, I'd just click on the desktop, open files, and get my work done. Now, even though I don't have a touchscreen, I keep clicking in the air with my mouse. Whatever Microsoft's goal is, for me it's just extra hassle.
I was also disappointed with the performance. I installed Windows 11 on my old laptop, and it seemed to use almost 30% of my hardware. Even my gaming performance took a serious hit—what used to run at 60fps on Windows 10 now struggles at 45. Sure, I messed around with the system requirements and closed unnecessary programs, but it's still frustrating. Feels more like forced updates than real innovation to me. Your hardware issue might also be due to the TPM 2.0 and Secure Boot requirements, I reckon.