The number of functioning computers that are restricted to Windows 10 probably still outnumber the number of computers that can run Windows 11. Most people don't have $500 to drop on a replacement. (Very many of these computers might've been thousands of dollars new and will still outperform the majority of new Windows 11 machines.)
Microsoft is just putting a huge environmental waste of a mandated obsolesence tax on the entire world. But Microsoft doesn't pay the opportunity cost of losing all that hardware. (I wonder how much the hardware Microsoft wants destroyed is worth, hundreds of millions of dollars?)
Sure and the number of computers that can run Linux outperform them both. Maybe you don't need W11?
I also don't think the share of TPM-less computers out there is actually that significant. Most laptops have shipped with one for a long time. Desktops that lack one can often buy one. Which is way cheaper than a new PC should you need W11. (I also suspect there are options way cheaper than $500 as well.)
Saying that not being able to run W11 turns something into e-waste is frankly rather crazy. Neither do they want that hardware destroyed.
There is still a lot of quite useful hardware that isn't supported. For example, the first gen Ryzen is apparently not supported, so then you're having to replace e.g. a Threadripper 1950X which has 16 cores and a 4GHz turbo. A new PC with even equivalent performance would be $600+ and a $500 new PC would be a downgrade.
There is also plenty of hardware that isn't fast but is being used in a situation where that doesn't matter. Some Haswell quad core being used for web and email could continue to be used for that indefinitely. That is old enough that it could be replaced with something newer for less than $500, but the entirety of the replacement cost is still lost money because it otherwise wouldn't have had to be replaced at all.
Hopefully this means I can get cheap 1st gen ryzens for my Linux computers soon.