As reported by Bleeping Computer, the consumer protection organization Euroconsumers has managed to determine Microsoft to provide one more year of free security updates to consumers in the EEA, without any strings attached. (Of course, you still need a Microsoft account to secure the ESU.)

So far, Euroconsumers has posted their reply to Microsoft Ireland. I find this utterly ridiculous, as the original document from Microsoft Ireland that announced their decision wasn’t confidential, even if it was an e-mail. While it wasn’t a press release (maybe such a thing will eventually be released), it definitely didn’t contain any personal data to be protected under the GDPR or by common courtesy. So Euroconsumers didn’t provide anything written by Microsoft, but only referred to the terms of the offer in an artificial reply e-mail! It’s like in those movies or novels where some criminals unnecessarily recap their plan in detail as an artificial way of informing the viewer or the reader!

Either way, the offer is only valid to people in the 27 European Union member states plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway. (Sorry, Switzerland. And Britain.)

From the said e-mail:

We are pleased to learn that Microsoft will provide a no-cost Extended Security Updates (ESU) option for Windows 10 consumer users in the European Economic Area (EEA). We are also glad this option will not require users to back up settings, apps, or credentials, or use Microsoft Rewards. This was our main Digital Markets Act (DMA) related concern, as linking access to essential security updates to engagement with Microsoft’s own services raised reasonable doubt of compliance with obligations under Article 6(6) of the DMA.

While we maintain our position on compliance with the Digital Content Directive, we are pleased to acknowledge that the updated enrollment flow will provide a clear option to extend device protection through October 13, 2026.

At the same time, several points from our original letter remain relevant. The ESU program is limited to one year, leaving devices that remain fully functional exposed to risk after October 13, 2026. Such a short-term measure falls short of what consumers can reasonably expect for a product that remains widely used and does not align with the spirit of the Digital Content Directive (DCD), nor the EU’s broader sustainable goals. Unlike previous operating system upgrades, which did not typically require new hardware, the move to Windows 11 does. This creates a huge additional burden for consumers, with some estimates suggesting that over 850 million active devices still rely on million Windows 10 and cannot be upgraded due to hardware requirements. By contrast, upgrades from Windows 7 or 8 to Windows 10 did not carry such limitations.

Microsoft also appears to be phasing out Windows 10 on a much shorter timeline than in the past: support is ending only four years after the launch of Windows 11. Previous versions were given a longer transition period: Windows 7 support ended eight years after Windows 8 was introduced, and Windows XP support ended seven years after the launch of Windows Vista. In earlier cases, Microsoft’s decision to end support coincided with a decline in user numbers, so that only a small share of the market relied on the retiring software. Our own survey confirms that a significant share of consumers remain on older but still functional devices: 22% still run Windows on a PC or laptop from 2017 or earlier, which cannot be upgraded to Windows 11 but continue to serve users’ everyday needs.

In particular, we wish to highlight that this decision undermines broader efforts toward circular consumption. Security updates are critical for the viability of refurbished and second-hand devices, which rely on continued support to remain usable and safe. Ending updates for functional Windows 10 systems accelerates electronic waste and undermines EU objectives on durable, sustainable digital products. …

We will inform consumers throughout our channels about the free one-year expansion, as well as any other updates on this matter. Likewise, we expect to engage in fruitful conversation with Microsoft over the next year to extend device protection furth.

Furth? Really?

When asked, the company has confirmed the change in a statement to Windows Central:

In the European Economic Area, we’re making updates to the enrollment process to ensure it meets local expectations and delivers a secure, streamlined experience. Our goal is to support customers and provide them with options as they transition to Windows 11, with uninterrupted access to critical security updates.

Counting right

While the hardware requirements for Windows 11 are absurd and unnecessary, the real time span to be computed is not between the release of Windows 10 and the release of Windows 11, but the supported life of hardware. A new computer purchased in 2017-2018 does or does not support Windows 11, depending on the included CPU. Older computers clearly are excluded. So hardware older than 7–8 years cannot have Windows 11. (Unless they install Windows 11 IoT Enterprise LTSC, which isn’t a consumer edition, or unless they use hacks such as those provided by Flyoobe.)

But let me remind you that Apple, a company that’s idolized by hundreds of millions for their “superior hardware” (despite the decreasing quality of their crap) and because macOS “is certified UNIX” and “just works” (not without issues, though), is even worse. A new Mac model typically gets about 6 years of new macOS security updates from the launch date!

This goes as follows: any Mac computer is supported by 3 future major OS versions before being declared “incompatible” (in which case, macOS will refuse to install on it); major macOS versions are released roughly every 12 months; and each major release is supported for 3 years. So: up to 3 years for the release of the next 3 versions + 3 years of support (1+2) for that last version. In the past, more than 10 years ago, when the release cycle was less regular, these ~6 years were in the range of 5–7 years.

The Strange Case of the 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro

While I said that Apple is generally worse than Microsoft in forcing people to buy newer hardware, here’s a black swan: at least for one particular model, Apple has made a huge exception and went way beyond the customary “+3 macOS generations” support policy.

The compatibility list for macOS 26 Tahoe, released on September 15, 2025, includes, among others:

  • Not supported: 8th Gen. Intel-based MacBooks from 2020 (MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro).
  • Supported: 9th Gen. Intel-based 16-inch MacBook Pro from 2019.

OK, the 16-inch 2019 MacBook Pro features a newer CPU than models from 2020, but this doesn’t explain everything. The fact that macOS 26 Tahoe is the last macOS to also support Intel CPUs might have played a role here (emulating Intel software on M1/M2/M3/M4 must be painful, so many people might defer the purchasing of new Macs, especially when owning a Pro one), but the situation was already unusual.

Think of this: For this lucky laptop model, the macOS 26 Tahoe, newer by 6 years, will get 2 more years of security updates after the release of the next macOS in September 2026, thus bringing the supported lifetime to 9 years! De jamais vu.

Let’s analyze it:

The 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro (9th Gen. Intel):

  • Was launched November 2019 with macOS 10.15 Catalina pre-installed.
  • According to Apple’s long-standing “+3 macOS generations” support policy, it should only have gone through:
  1. macOS 11 Big Sur (2020)
  2. macOS 12 Monterey (2021)
  3. macOS 13 Ventura (2022)

At that point (2022), it should have become incompatible with new macOS releases.

And yet, Apple kept it compatible with:

  • macOS 14 Sonoma (2023)
  • macOS 15 Sequoia (2024)
  • macOS 26 Tahoe (2025), the last Intel-capable release.

That means this model got +6 macOS versions beyond launch, not just +3.

The fact that this MacBook Pro shouldn’t even have seen Sonoma or Sequoia makes its Tahoe support and 9-year life even more extraordinary. It’s most likely the longest official support window for any Mac since the transition to Intel in 2006! As far as I know, Apple has never before allowed a Mac model to go beyond the +3 OS boundary, no matter how “flagship” it was.

But guess what?

  • Nobody wrote in 2023 about the strange fact that this laptop was still supported by macOS 14 Sonoma.
  • Nobody wrote in 2024 about the strange fact that this laptop was still supported by macOS 15 Sequoia.
  • Nobody has written so far about the strange fact that this laptop is still supported by macOS 26 Tahoe.

Not a single article. Not a single blog post. No traces on forums or Reddit. Everyone limits themselves to reporting that it’s supported, but only as part of a list, without singling it out.

Are Mac users usually that retarded? I expected most Mac users to be unknowledgeable, but what about the specialized magazines and websites?

Before the Apple Silicon era (because now people likely know they own an M1, M2, M3, or M4-powered laptop), most owners of an Intel-based Mac didn’t know the exact CPU they owned. They might have known either the generation (7th, 8th, 9th, 10th) or the model line (i5, i7, i9), but not the exact model (i5‑5250U, i5‑5350U, i5‑8279U, i5‑8210Y, i5‑1030NG7, i7‑6567U, i7‑8559U, i7‑8750H, i7‑9750H, i9‑8950HK, i9‑9980HK).

Apple wanted them to be stupid and uninformed. Apple almost never advertised the exact Intel CPU model! Instead, product pages and keynote slides would say things like “Quad‑core Intel Core i7” or “Up to 8‑core Intel Core i9”. Go figure. And even the MacBook models are only identified by the year of the release and the screen size! No specific model code or name! WTF is this poetic approach to technology?!

Either way, how couldn’t a single Mac-focused magazine notice the policy-breaking situation of the 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro? They had two full years for that!

I’ll never use a Mac or anything from Apple. I don’t want to join the herd of the retards.