I'm planning on installing windows 11 in a vm for verious testing purposes and was wondering if there where any methods of bypassing the tpm requirement on windows 11? if anyone could help with this it would be much appreciated (and the vm will be running on vmware player on windows 10)

Edited April 6, 20233 yr by legacyfan

See this article: https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/bypass-windows-11-tpm-requirement

Just now, mina7601 said:

See this article: https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/bypass-windows-11-tpm-requirement

thanks mina! 

31 minutes ago, legacyfan said:

thanks mina! 

You're welcome! Did it work? Were you able to install Windows 11 in a VM?

ive not tried it yet but i will try it as soon as I can 

Edited April 6, 20233 yr by legacyfan

Windows 11 21H2 does not have the TPM requirement.

1 minute ago, Tripredacus said:

Windows 11 21H2 does not have the TPM requirement.

I did not realize that thanks @Tripredacus for the information

To answer the very first sentence of your opening post, Yes, Windows 11/Pro/64 can be made to install regardless of TPM or any other MS imposed restriction. 

The secret, which is actually no secret anymore is:  Once you've downloaded the Windows 11 ISO from a trusted source, you must use "Rufus" (latest ver.) to burn ISO to a Flash Drive, accepting the options that Rufus gives you.

Then the Flash Drive can install Win-11 to just about any PC, even those way too old to meet Microsoft's parameters.

I've done this many times already, and it works just great. 

On 4/6/2023 at 1:44 PM, legacyfan said:

I'm planning on installing windows 11 in a vm for verious testing purposes and was wondering if there where any methods of bypassing the tpm requirement on windows 11? if anyone could help with this it would be much appreciated (and the vm will be running on vmware player on windows 10)

I wrote an article on this! See here: 

.

On 4/6/2023 at 9:05 PM, Tripredacus said:

Windows 11 21H2 does not have the TPM requirement.

exactly and people always said:

that will not happen

intel will never support a such mechanism 

they dont just change their policies / terms of use to something more bad -> even more is possible 

now intel even removes SSE commands

they removed the 16 and 32 bit modes too - what is wrong using a old hardware with a new cpu ?

or also "security is always good" yes against yourself - and making the software secure against you for microsoft - security against you - security for microsoft

 

and thats also why they stopped the support for this version there was nothing wrong with it 

On 6/15/2023 at 1:43 PM, user57 said:

exactly and people always said:

that will not happen

intel will never support a such mechanism 

they dont just change their policies / terms of use to something more bad -> even more is possible 

now intel even removes SSE commands

they removed the 16 and 32 bit modes too - what is wrong using a old hardware with a new cpu ?

or also "security is always good" yes against yourself - and making the software secure against you for microsoft - security against you - security for microsoft

 

and thats also why they stopped the support for this version there was nothing wrong with it 

typical Intel for you

On 6/17/2023 at 8:39 PM, legacyfan said:

typical Intel for you

Care to expand?

oh yes the idea of removing the SSE instructions by intel is a such thing

 

intel probaly knows that SSE is a good competitor that actally can solve the compressions fast

 

to get rid of those and programming their AVX512 they can force you to a new computer/cpu

and those intel 12 gen + are spywares - and benefits systems or mechnism that support such idea´s

they just make certain the computer is safe against you - for microsoft 

 

thats the idea - intel and microsoft seems to be brothers in arms in this question

 

 

if SSE would stay there would be a valid good solution for intense compression 

it it also backwards compatible what avx512 is not 

 

microsoft creating a new monopoly ? microsoft is well known for lawsuits in that direction

only one of many many many cases:

https://www.jurist.org/news/2022/12/microsoft-faces-private-antitrust-lawsuit-over-68-7b-purchase-of-activision-blizzard/

 

there had to be something wrong with the "deal"