a) The intel stuff they're pushing is silly and should be loosened, and made part of their Windows 10 label OEM thing
b) TPM 2.0 will be a massive step forward for security, possibly the most significant since XP Service Pack 2, and I understand why Microsoft is getting aggressive about this.
Frankly, I think most people discussing this don't seem to know what the hell they're talking about. I'm really just presenting facts.
If you're asking about 1.2 vs 2.0, 2.0 makes considerable progress on the original specification both in terms of hardening of the TPM and its capabilities, allowing for it to be used in a much more broad set of authorization and authentication schemes.
If tomorrow every user had a TPM, and major services supported it, it would massively change the security landscape - I really can't stress enough that it eliminates some of the most widely exploited attacker techniques.
Virtually nobody buying a windows machine new today knows that their new machine has less than 4 years of life if it's 7th gen if they even know it's 7th gen.
There may still be machines in retail channels sold new next year since Intel merely stopped taking orders for said chips last year.
If it's EOL in 2025 you could have machines sold new that become unsupported in 3 years whereas the average lifespan of a PC is 6 years.
Why are you defending a metacorp planning on creating untold tons of toxic waste and destruction of millions of dollars of consumer value.
It ought to be illegal to sell a new cimp with less than 6 years of supported life from date of sale and buyers ought to be entitled to a partial refund if this promise isn't kept with the retail seller expecting to get their money back from the OEM who has a contract with suppliers like Microsoft not to do stupid shit like this to necessitate such refunds in the first place.