Microsoft: New CPUs Will Require Windows 10

Jim Kim said:
I had a customers brick 3 years ago. Just because it did not happen to you.....
Click to expand...

To continue on since I pressed submit to early. The only bios fails I've seen the last 5 years is an enthusiast messing with bios, but they were able to recover it with a dual bios.

Maybe it's just me being optimistic but I've got a gut feelings companies aren't gonna purposefully explode computers to make more work and lose more money on their end. There will be redundancies in place, and the only people who will ever know or bitch about this stuff are enthusiast like us. It probably won't be rare to see dual bios, or stuff like that. Yeah there will be your isolated issues, but we as consumers complain about what happens to one computer and conveniently don't give a shit about the 10,000 that work fine.

Five years later when it's all standard no one will care, things move on.

Hell 2 years ago there was hell and high water because Microsoft is "Dropping" support for Windows XP. People were complaning all in the forums about how their precious os will stop working, that they were being forced to upgrade, that they didn't want to spend money on a new os. I think from the completely sound of crickets chirping, and tumbleweeds rolling by that the windows xp issue isn't a problem at all.
 
trentchau said:
Is this still a thing. I haven't had a bios update brick a computer since 2003
Click to expand...

Mostly because you've had control over the BIOS update environment.

You don't do dumb shit like "Let's upgrade the BIOS during a lightning storm while on UPS power!"

Can you HONESTLY say that you trust Microsoft's software to be this intelligent?
 
Isn't this basically just passing the buck to Intel? Usually when I'm installing a couple year old OS on a new computer I have to install a bunch of drivers anyway, how is this any different?

Seems like a big deal over a non-issue.
 
Chas said:
Mostly because you've had control over the BIOS update environment.

You don't do dumb shit like "Let's upgrade the BIOS during a lightning storm while on UPS power!"

Can you HONESTLY say that you trust Microsoft's software to be this intelligent?
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

No because part of me is still cynical and doubtful.

Yes because being in the IT field for a while now (not as long as some people here, only 20 years here) I've seen an evolution of some crazy stuff that works not that was just a dream a few years ago.

Hell I remember installing windows 2000 and xp and hoping I had all the right drivers on cd to get a machine running, while now if I build a new computer nearly 80% of all the drivers needed are downloaded or already working on a new build.

There are things now computers do are so fully automated that I just take it for granted. Kinda like when I was 16 having a car with power windows was a luxury, now having a car without power windows means you are purposefully buying an antique.

Do I trust Microsoft, not not really, but I do feel in 3~5 years this probably isn't going to be an issue and the defacto standard on how it's done.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
Aren't skylake chips currently running on windows 7?
Click to expand...

Yes. There's a bit of a difference between "New CPUs require Windows 10" and "Microsoft only supports Windows 10 on new CPUs".

Those who don't understand the difference need to take a chill pill.
 
I read this, laughing, as I game from Linux.

Oh Microsoft. You give me so many reasons to stop using your shit, and so few to use it.
 
M76 said:
That was my first thought too.

Apparently this only means, that you can't ask for help from MS support if you don't run Windows10. When did they ever help anyway?

This is just another chapter in the soap opera " MS is trying to push you to use W10, in the most hideous ways"
Click to expand...

Indeed.
Its not going to prevent Win 7 operating with new hardware, or change how it operates unless MS stoop low enough to deliberately gimp Windows 7.
 
BillR said:
It all seems a bit pushy even for MS.

Collusion with the silicone folk?

Let the lawsuits begin....
Click to expand...

Sounds more like OS side enforced policy. Windows 7 will update with an algorithm that will detect the CPU, if its a new one, Win7 will stop working.
 
M76 said:
That was my first thought too.

Apparently this only means, that you can't ask for help from MS support if you don't run Windows10. When did they ever help anyway?

This is just another chapter in the soap opera " MS is trying to push you to use W10, in the most hideous ways"
Click to expand...
It's just another chapter of inflammatory internet articles and successful baiting by [H], in reality this is just big news for business, home consumers barely got support out of Microsoft to begin with so running outdated windows 7 on new hardware doesn't mean much.
 
evilsofa said:
Yes. There's a bit of a difference between "New CPUs require Windows 10" and "Microsoft only supports Windows 10 on new CPUs".

Those who don't understand the difference need to take a chill pill.
Click to expand...
To be fair, it's a little more complicated than that, even if you had worded it more accurately ("Microsoft only supports newer CPUs on Windows 10" is what MS stated, namely with Skylake and later CPUs from both AMD and Intel).

I think the problem lies in support length, since MS is already talking about dropping hardware support 6 years after release of Windows 7 SP1, and only 3 years after release of Windows 8.1 Update (analogous to a SP, and is the supported state mentioned in the product lifecycle document). In particular, Windows 8.1 is getting new CPU support dropped *before* the end of mainstream support.

There are a few outcomes of this neglect:
1) It's no big deal. Nothing significant changes in newer SoCs which prevent Windows 7 from being used on it, and all integrated devices work if the manufacturer offers all necessary drivers.

2) Kaby Lake or Cannonlake break some legacy compatibility and require kernel updates to work. System replacement in corporations not moving to Windows 10 becomes a problem for a couple of years after legacy CPUs start disappearing. Linux nerds may laugh as Linux added compatibility to LTS releases with a simple patch months earlier. Rage level low.

3) Some useful new CPU feature may be added that requires a simple OS level change to enable. MS refuses to make a patch available on the desktop side, while providing a patch on the server side for similar extended support products. lol, probably.
 
I love just how much MS wants us to toss millions of pounds of good working computers in the trash
 
PeaKr said:
Win7 is 6 years old. I don't know, but I'm sure many linux distros will eventually support these processors just fine.
Click to expand...

Eventually?
This is x86/x86_64, when hasn't GNU/Linux been compatible?

Hell, there are some Linux distros which will still run on m68k ISA from the 1980s.
This is Microsoft killing compatibility in software (via hardware detection), it has nothing to do with incompatible CPUs.


trentchau said:
Oh cool. How is doom 2 and serious sam 1 on Linux? It's been a while since I've played them.
Click to expand...
Quite well actually.
See: PlayOnLinux or WINE
 
According to AnandTech, not being "supported" likely means new features in future CPUs won't get utilized under Win 7.

Microsoft has long been the bastion of long term support for older platforms, so today’s support news out of Redmond is particularly surprising. Intel launched its 6th generation Skylake cores back in August, and support on Windows 7 has been not as strong as Windows 10 right out of the gate. It’s not terribly strange that new features like Intel’s Speed Shift will not be coming to Windows 7, but today Microsoft announced that going forward, new processors will only be supported on Windows 10. Skylake will only be supported through devices on a supported list, and even those will only have support until July 2017.
Click to expand...
 
M76 said:
That was my first thought too.

Apparently this only means, that you can't ask for help from MS support if you don't run Windows10. When did they ever help anyway?

This is just another chapter in the soap opera " MS is trying to push you to use W10, in the most hideous ways"
Click to expand...

I don't normally buy into the lawsuit BS, but this looks like a lawsuit waiting to happen. If a person/company bought a skylake machine last month with Windows 7 or 8.1, it came with support through 20/23.

I don't see how they can retroactively say, they aren't supporting it. I can see how they'd say that for Kaby Lake and future CPUs, but this seems to go beyond that.
 
PeaKr said:
Is this the best MS can come up with to get people to upgrade? Sooner or later people are going to get tired of this shit and move on to something else.
Click to expand...

To what? Linux? Not a shot. OS X? Same things happen there and the hardware costs more (though every user I know seems to think the experience is better).

It may happen, but the platform that they'll move to probably doesn't exist.
 
PeaKr said:
Win7 is 6 years old. I don't know, but I'm sure many linux distros will eventually support these processors just fine.
Click to expand...

But will it be the os from 6-7(*) years ago, or a new release (likely running a newer version of the kernel)?

(*) 7 was RTM in 7/22/2009...a week from now we'll round up to 7 years ;)
 
trentchau said:
Is this still a thing. I haven't had a bios update brick a computer since 2003
Click to expand...

I've never had one brick. I kinda thought they had built in backups to revert if things went wrong (or was it just my imagination?)
 
n=1 said:
According to AnandTech, not being "supported" likely means new features in future CPUs won't get utilized under Win 7.
Click to expand...

This is probably less of an issue if this is the case. If they refuse to support the OS at all, that'd be a problem (and worth a lawsuit).
 
nilepez said:
But will it be the os from 6-7(*) years ago, or a new release (likely running a newer version of the kernel)?

(*) 7 was RTM in 7/22/2009...a week from now we'll round up to 7 years ;)
Click to expand...
Windows 7 SP1 was released near the end of February in 2011. Why run a 6.5 year old OS when there's a perfectly good not quite 5 year old OS available? ;)
 
pxc said:
Windows 7 SP1 was released near the end of February in 2011. Why run a 6.5 year old OS when there's a perfectly good not quite 5 year old OS available? ;)
Click to expand...

Because "fuck M$" forcing me to install service packs ;)
Also because I consider SP1 to be the same OS with fixes. The only exception I can think of is XP SP2.
 
Crosshairs said:
dont count on it..



if I understand it correctly, `its meaningless unless you need support `..and how many of us here have ever asked MS for support? `
Click to expand...

I actually made a very detailed thread on their support forum about a very obvious bug in Windows 7 that has to do with it messing up if you change where My Documents or the other library folders are.

They came back with - that is how it is designed to work.

Basically what happens is that if you move the location (a supported setting), and then do the same thing again into a sub-folder of the original folder you moved it to, it them makes the original folder unable to be deleted or renamed even after you move the location again.

You can basically end up with a folder structure that looks like this:
C:\My Documents\My Documents\My Documents\ and so on and so forth with absolutely no way to rename or delete any of the folders besides wiping the drive.

Sure it was designed like that.. Something they just don't want to bother even trying to fix. Probably because almost nobody ever changes the setting from the default setting.
 
And to add to the above, this is almost as bad as the Visual Studio 2003 compiler not checking for use of internal compiler variables before compiling.

Ever try to debug a program that for no reason whatsoever will never actually assign the correct value to a variable even if you are hard coding the value to put into the variable?

I was about to throw my computer out the window when I decided to just try renaming a couple of the variables and it magically just started working as expected.
 
cyclone3d said:
I actually made a very detailed thread on their support forum about a very obvious bug in Windows 7 that has to do with it messing up if you change where My Documents or the other library folders are.

They came back with - that is how it is designed to work.

Basically what happens is that if you move the location (a supported setting), and then do the same thing again into a sub-folder of the original folder you moved it to, it them makes the original folder unable to be deleted or renamed even after you move the location again.

You can basically end up with a folder structure that looks like this:
C:\My Documents\My Documents\My Documents\ and so on and so forth with absolutely no way to rename or delete any of the folders besides wiping the drive.

Sure it was designed like that.. Something they just don't want to bother even trying to fix. Probably because almost nobody ever changes the setting from the default setting.
Click to expand...

cyclone3d said:
And to add to the above, this is almost as bad as the Visual Studio 2003 compiler not checking for use of internal compiler variables before compiling.

Ever try to debug a program that for no reason whatsoever will never actually assign the correct value to a variable even if you are hard coding the value to put into the variable?

I was about to throw my computer out the window when I decided to just try renaming a couple of the variables and it magically just started working as expected.
Click to expand...

Ah the old works as designed. I've heard that from more than one s/w vendor who was defending an obvious bug. In one case the person defending it had described how it was supposed to work in an email, which directly contradicted what they were saying. They still didn't fix it.

cyclone3d said:
And to add to the above, this is almost as bad as the Visual Studio 2003 compiler not checking for use of internal compiler variables before compiling.

Ever try to debug a program that for no reason whatsoever will never actually assign the correct value to a variable even if you are hard coding the value to put into the variable?
Click to expand...

Yes I have, but that was a long time ago on Solaris....and it sucked.
 
P4B said:
I love just how much MS wants us to toss millions of pounds of good working computers in the trash
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you understand the article.

They don't want you to toss anything. They want you to install Windows 10 on everything.
 
trentchau said:
Oh cool. How is doom 2 and serious sam 1 on Linux? It's been a while since I've played them.
Click to expand...

I just sorted Steam games for the Linux platform and it lists 3579 games. It not like the old days where there were a handful of games that worked on Linux.
 
From the Article:
For the listed systems, along with our OEM partners, we will perform special testing to help future proof customers' investments, ensure regular validation of Windows Updates with the intent of reducing potential regressions including security concerns, and ensure all drivers will be on Windows Update with published BIOS/UEFI upgrading tools, which will help unlock the security and power management benefits of Windows 10 once the systems are upgraded.​

Yeah, because I trust MS to update my BIOS whenever the fuck it wants to.
 
Bobert said:
I just sorted Steam games for the Linux platform and it lists 3579 games. It not like the old days where there were a handful of games that worked on Linux.
Click to expand...

It was a joke ya know :) But there is this

You should of also put up that there are currently 7442 games on steam.

So while there is a lot of Linux games, its still less than 50% of the total market.
 
nilepez said:
This is probably less of an issue if this is the case. If they refuse to support the OS at all, that'd be a problem (and worth a lawsuit).
Click to expand...

Not worth a lawsuit at all, and the fact you even went there is ridiculous. There is no guarantee that software will support your hardware. If you consider that lawsuit-worthy, you better start suing all these different Linux distro groups that don't support X hardware or Y feature or sue games publishers because Crysis 3 won't run on your Pentium 4.

Microsoft is playing hardball here, but I don't blame them. If they really want to make a difference, drop Win32 support.
 
Bobert said:
I just sorted Steam games for the Linux platform and it lists 3579 games. It not like the old days where there were a handful of games that worked on Linux.
Click to expand...

There were 3000 game releases on Steam in 2015. Your figure is not nearly as large or impressive as you apparently believe. Worse: most of the new releases are throwaway indie garbage no one will ever play.

Linux will not take off as a gaming platform until a. AAA releases are available on Linux same day and date as the Windows versions, and b. past catalogs somehow become playable. Oh, you just moved to Linux as your new gaming OS, but you want to replay Assassin's Creed 2? You're SOL.

Unofficially, console emulators need to dramatically improve on the Linux side as well. Console emulation on Linux is abysmal.
 
Terpfen said:
If they really want to make a difference, drop Win32 support.
Click to expand...

Of all of the accusations made against Microsoft disenfranchising its customers, this would be an action that I guarantee would universally be seen as such at this time. It is not practical. It is not needed. It gets Microsoft and its customer nothing at this point.
 
Terpfen said:
There were 3000 game releases on Steam in 2015. Your figure is not nearly as large or impressive as you apparently believe. Worse: most of the new releases are throwaway indie garbage no one will ever play.

Linux will not take off as a gaming platform until a. AAA releases are available on Linux same day and date as the Windows versions, and b. past catalogs somehow become playable. Oh, you just moved to Linux as your new gaming OS, but you want to replay Assassin's Creed 2? You're SOL.

Unofficially, console emulators need to dramatically improve on the Linux side as well. Console emulation on Linux is abysmal.
Click to expand...

For some who play games casually like myself, it doesn't really impact me that much. Not all of my library is compatible with Linux, but a few choice games I do like play perfectly fine. For me having control of the OS takes priority over being able to play every game on Steam. I guess it comes down to where your priorities are.
 
heatlesssun said:
Of all of the accusations made against Microsoft disenfranchising its customers, this would be an action that I guarantee would universally be seen as such at this time. It is not practical. It is not needed. It gets Microsoft and its customer nothing at this point.
Click to expand...

Must you always incessantly appear in every random thread that has even a distant relationship to Microsoft? You are the person the "Something is WRONG on the internet!" comic is talking about.

And for the record, dropping Win32 is the biggest security fix Microsoft can ship.
 
heatlesssun said:
And the priory for most people is being able to do things with their PC, not controlling every detail of it.
Click to expand...

Which is why I find Windows the perfect compromise between mac and linux. It feels like you can do everything os wise and do little software wise on Linux. You can do nothing OS wise, and do little software wise on Mac. You can do a medium level of stuff, and EVERYTHING in the world you want on PC.

But I am excited to see Linux gaming going up. From what I limitedly read though I thought there was compounded issues with Linux as a gaming system such as limited games mixed with driver issues for video cards for both AMD and Nvidia. Are driver issues that much a problem? I'm not a linux guy at all so I don't know.


Back on topic though, my earlier comments were with the misinterpretation that somehow MS could do a hardware lockout. If it's just support than as mentioned above most of the people affected by this would do their own support or find support. I find this in the same vein as companies that offer a "Limited Lifetime Warrenty". You can only cover so many things before something bites you in the ass. I don't think MS should be responsible because someone can't get their NVME drive to boot up to windows vista or something like that.
 
Terpfen said:
Must you always incessantly appear in every random thread that has even a distant relationship to Microsoft? You are the person the "Something is WRONG on the internet!" comic is talking about.

And for the record, dropping Win32 is the biggest security fix Microsoft can ship.
Click to expand...

I use a great deal of Windows based tech, more than most even in a place like this. Dropping Win32 support would render almost all of it useless. I'm simply pointing out the obvious that would have detrimental effect to countless millions at this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top