Microsoft may block updates on new PCs running Windows 7 or 8.1

A while back, Microsoft let the world know that it'd only support recent CPUs in the Intel Kaby Lake, AMD Ryzen, and Qualcomm 8996 families under Windows 10. Now, there's a little smoke and fire in some corners of the internet, though, since a Microsoft Knowledge Base page has popped up about a potential error message that users with systems based on the forementioned CPUs might encounter when running Windows Update. More to the point, you might be told that "your PC uses a processor that isn't supported on this version of Windows," and that you'll need to upgrade to Windows 10.

Despite this bit of news making the rounds around the web, and the fact that there's a running Reddit thread with close to 600 comments on the subject, there have yet to be reports of systems in the wild where this error message popped up. The support page doesn't appear to be a fluke, though, since searching the Knowledge Base for article 4012982 yields results in multiple languages.

The company stated back as early as August 2016 that Windows 10 is the only supported version for new-generation systems, and its FAQ says as much:

As new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support. This enables us to focus on deep integration between Windows and the silicon, while maintaining maximum reliability and compatibility with previous generations of platform and silicon. For example, Windows 10 will be the only supported Windows platform on Intel's upcoming "Kaby Lake" silicon, Qualcomm’s upcoming "8996" silicon, and AMD's upcoming "Bristol Ridge" silicon.

Rather predictably, some commenters are up in arms about this event, assuming it ever pops up in production systems. However, as recently as January, Youtuber JayzTwoCents installed Windows 8.1 on a Kaby Lake Core i5 system without fuss. Veering a little into an editorial piece, there are a few things to consider. The whole situation begets the question of what are the expectations of users trying to run what's effectively a legacy OS on their new boxes, since they already knew what the support policy is. Ma and Pa may not, but it's not likely they're installing a fresh operating system on their computers anyway.

There's also the matter of install media to consider. While there's a Media Creation Toolkit for Windows 10, most people trying to install Windows 7 or 8.1 will use a DVD or USB stick that (as far as we know) doesn't appear to have a CPU generation check, and possibly never will. That means that in order to not let people use an unsupported OS, it makes at least some sense that the check be done in Windows Update.

Technically-minded users might point out that they're fine with running an "unsupported" operating system at their own risk, but the average user is likely not even aware of Microsoft's policy regarding Windows 7 and 8.1. In turn, he may encounter problems that he doesn't know the origin of, much less how to fix them.

Flipping the subject on its head, it could be argued that at least Windows 8.1 could be supported on those CPUs, since its support ends in 2023, while Windows 7's EOL is reasonably close in 2020. At this point, it's difficult to tell if Microsoft's policy and execution on the matter creates a real problem.

Comments closed
    • adamlongwalker
    • 3 years ago

    Because of Micro$haft’s current policies I am probably going to be heading towards Linux and/or BSD variation. And knowing how Micro$shaft works if there is a real Linux contender that gains real popularity against Windows OS they will crush them utterly.

    IMHO I consider Linux as whole splintered enough for MicroShaft to not lower the boom at this moment but they are preparing to do so when the time comes.

    I could put a bunch of Url’s making my point but these two will do fine to get my point across

    [url<]http://techrights.org/2015/03/21/patent-lawsuits-not-love/[/url<] [url<]http://techrights.org/2017/03/15/still-using-patents-to-coerce/[/url<] The OS's I am looking into are: Linux flavors - Zorin, PCLinuxOS BSD Flavors - True OS, FreeBSD Unusual OS - React OS I am REALLY HOPING that Ryzen is Linux Friendly. IF so I'll build an really expensive Rig out of AMD parts.

      • DoomGuy64
      • 3 years ago

      Linux sux.
      [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMKeWTVYBUo[/url<] That said, I would try either Suse or Mint.

        • Krogoth
        • 3 years ago

        Linux doesn’t suck. The problem is that most of the Linux distributions are an OS built and made for programmers and computer hobbyists.

        The learning curve isn’t as steep as it used to be either, but most people simply don’t have the motivation or time to re-learn everything to move away from the Apple/Windows UI schema.

    • albundy
    • 3 years ago

    Even with the cross bones on the windows flag?

    • dikowexeyu
    • 3 years ago

    Evil Microsoft is evil.

    I used to be unconditional fan of Windows…

      • albundy
      • 3 years ago

      more like the diet coke of evil. Apple is the real Dr. Evil!

    • fix
    • 3 years ago

    On the bright side, if Microsoft keeps annoying customers (with ads on the lock screen etc.), perhaps an alternative will appear and end the dominance of Windows operating system on PCs.

      • tipoo
      • 3 years ago

      The year of Linux on the desktop, take 20!

      In all seriousness I like the way Elementary Linux is looking.

    • anotherengineer
    • 3 years ago

    Hmmm I was going to use 8.1 Pro for a new build.

    Does anyone know if MS allows user control of updates on W10 yet? I seen a few systems get a bit wonky by auto downloading and installing whatever drivers it wants.

      • yogibbear
      • 3 years ago

      No they do not. >:(

      • psuedonymous
      • 3 years ago

      [quote<]Does anyone know if MS allows user control of updates on W10 yet?[/quote<]Yes, on all version [i<]except[/i<] for Windows 10 Home.

      • DrDominodog51
      • 3 years ago

      On Windows 10 Pro, I can disable updates completely by disabling the Windows Update service, but I can’t do anything else.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 3 years ago

    latest win 10 update now shows me ads on the lock screen, btw.

    • DPete27
    • 3 years ago

    I hope this turns out to be a myth. I have almost a dozen win7 keys that I haven’t yet used. It was bad enough when MS wouldn’t let me clear them for free win10 upgrade without first having them installed on a machine. Now they’re making them completely useless? Can I get a refund?

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    Bottomline, Microsoft REALLY wants us all to get on Windows 10, otherwise you won’t be able to buy, sell, trade, play games, watch movies, surf the Internet, etc.

    Who would’ve thought the Mark of the Beast ‘666’ would come in the form of an operating system, eh? You think the devil is that stupid to think it would be a literal 666? No way would anyone accept it. It had to come as a free Windows upgrade. /end times

      • K-L-Waster
      • 3 years ago

      6 groups of 6 alphanumeric characters?

      • crabjokeman
      • 3 years ago

      Or you could just use Linux…

        • ronch
        • 3 years ago

        Nope.

          • srg86
          • 3 years ago

          Then you can’t complain if you’re not interested in the alternatives. And they could be anythng, even the Mac (so this is not just a Linux comment). It could be the case of vote with your wallet.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            I was once a Linux fan. Still check it out once in a while. No. Not yet really a viable alternative.

    • kuttan
    • 3 years ago

    Since Microsoft obliged to deliver windows updates for Windows 7 up to 2020 how can they discriminate its users based on new PC or old ?? If those antitrust regulators have spine should take strong action against Microsoft for doing such 3rd rate cheap marketing tactics.

      • DancinJack
      • 3 years ago

      No.

      • tacitust
      • 3 years ago

      It’s got very little to do with “cheap marketing tactics.” It costs money to support older platforms on the new hardware, including testing any updates they make to Windows 7 between now and 2020. I’m no fan of MS, but they have every right to do this since they have clearly laid out which hardware platforms they will continue to support until 2020 (which for Skylake, was originally 2018, by the way, so they have extended some support.

      Not even the EU regulators, who are far more ready to take on the big boys over their business practices, are going to sweat this one.

        • kuttan
        • 3 years ago

        What you talk about is MS mainstream support which includes compatibility fixes to new hardware which was already ended some 2 years ago. Currently Windows 7 is in extended support the period during which MS issues security updates upto 2020. Security updates had no specific compatibility issues with hardware. The way MS discriminates its users based on new PC or old for getting Windows updates won’t stand legally if one really wanted to go that way.

          • YellaChicken
          • 3 years ago

          While I’m not particularly happy with this either, i think you just made Microsoft’s defense case for them

          [quote<] compatibility fixes to new hardware which was already ended some 2 years ago [/quote<] This is new hardware, unsupported is unsupported.

          • MOSFET
          • 3 years ago

          Is it really any different than Intel’s “discrimination” as you put it?

      • psuedonymous
      • 3 years ago

      [quote<]Since Microsoft obliged to deliver windows updates for Windows 7 up to 2020 [/quote<]Security patches only. Update support ended [url=https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/13853/windows-lifecycle-fact-sheet<]more than two years ago[/url<].

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    Some other company really needs to put a viable and polished commercial OS together. Microsoft has been left alone far too long to dictate what happens in PC Land. And no, not Linux. We need something really well thought out not just for geeks but for everyone. And the industry needs to band together behind it to let Microsoft know people are tired of them.

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    Have you ever wondered how you’d feel when you buy a washing machine then find out it refuses to wash your old clothes and it will only wash new ones? Then displays ads from clothing companies?

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    I can understand Windows 7 not providing support for newer hardware. That’s fine. That’s like Valve saying they’re not gonna update Half-Life 1 to support AVX but you can run it on a Ryzen just fine. But if they’ll deliberately patch Windows 7 to display an error message when it sees newer processors to strongly nudge users to get Windows 10, well, that is just evil. That is just unprecedented.

      • EzioAs
      • 3 years ago

      It’s not blocking usage or displaying an error message when it’s used with older hardware, the system will just be not getting updates. Or am I understanding your post incorrectly and this response is just moot?

        • ronch
        • 3 years ago

        If you check the Reddit thread,

        [url<]https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5zob94/microsoft_is_now_blocking_windows_7_and_windows/[/url<] Yes, Microsoft displays error messages to strongly nudge the user to get Windows 10. 'No updates' will likewise threaten them a little as well. And this isn't automatic : Microsoft deliberately put code in there during the update process for Windows to do this. As the article states, DVD install discs probably don't contain a CPU check so this is probably a new idea they thought up to push people to get Windows 10. I don't remember XP promoting Vista or 7 this way, and I've run XP up to 2009 on a Phenom II. I bet you can run XP on a Haswell without these mini threats as well unless they thought of that recently too.

    • HERETIC
    • 3 years ago

    Hey-No more Telemetry-And then I woke up…………………………………………

    • thedosbox
    • 3 years ago

    So this is part of Microsoft’s scheme to encourage people to buy Ryzen? That’ll please certain people here.

      • MOSFET
      • 3 years ago

      Nice. I got a good lol out of it.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      Er, maybe it’s the other way around?

      • tipoo
      • 3 years ago

      Does it sell new chips or does it move Windows 10 marketshare?

      Windows 10 runs on older chips, but Ryzen and KL will soon ONLY run Windows 10.

      Would I rather move to an older chip to run an older OS, or newer OS to run the newest chip?

    • Ummagumma
    • 3 years ago

    An old Texan guy that I used to work for would say, “This is communism plain & simple”.

    That old guy might be a bit crazy, but he was in the US Navy in the 1970s so he might know a thing or two about communism.

    The way I see this position from Micro$haft: Expect people that do not want to migrate to Windows 10 to look into Macs & MacOS or Linux or other alternatives. Of course there will be some people that have no choice but to upgrade to Windows 10, “spyware for non-descript targets”.

    Micro$haft’s position, however odd it may seem, does have a valid business reason to exist and that is keeping development resources and staff on a very mature OS with little or no revenue stream doesn’t make sense. I think Micro$haft execs looked at the longevity, while disregarding the stability & wide adoption, of Windows 7 and decided, “Never again. We need $$$.”

    Even Linux has endured some very major architectural changes over the years (removal of the “BKL” and so on), yet some Linux distributions can be run on IA32 x86 hardware going back to original Athlons, Celerons & Pentiums. Micro$haft could have never done that for lack of a revenue stream to pay for it. Ahh… the differences between “for profit” and “for free” software development.

      • Wirko
      • 3 years ago

      Hey, he knows about communism what the Navy told him about communism, doesn’t he?

      • kruky
      • 3 years ago

      That’s actually the opposite of communism. This is capitalism.

        • DoomGuy64
        • 3 years ago

        Capitalism is a free market, this is fascism or corporatism. Linux is probably closer to communism.

          • kruky
          • 3 years ago

          This is free market. They are independent company and have right to decide what to do with their product. And of course things would be a bit different if there was a real competition for Windows.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 3 years ago

            Sure. Valve just needs to put more work into SteamOS.

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 3 years ago

          Linux is communism, while granting freedom to its users. Meanwhile an unregulated free market actually seeks to take away the freedom of consumers, and reducing government can in fact increase entrapment of the people, etc. Twitter is poorly suited to conveying the complexity of issues. Dictators love slogans.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 3 years ago

            Unregulated doesn’t mean what you think it means. A true unregulated market would be chock full of knockoffs. Users would have way more freedom, but you would also have to sort through a lot of garbage. Think Steam early access. We do not have free market capitalism in this country, nor does it’s pure unadulterated form appeal to anyone but a small percentage of die hard libertarians. Sure, less regulation is good, but to what exent, and what regulations are absolutely necessary to keep a stable economy? It’s definitely a balancing act. It may be possible to have an unregulated economy, but it would only work if retail outlets acted as the regulators instead of the government.

            Linux comes close to being an unregulated ecosystem with forking, but it isn’t completely unregulated, nor does it follow any set market ideology other than supporting open source. Linux is mostly a hybrid meritocracy. It isn’t communist, but I’m sure communists use it, just as they also use Apple, Google, and Microsoft.

            As far as twitter goes, right now it is the reluctant platform of Trump, and only because he is the main user keeping it relevant. Free speech for everyone else is censored, and if Trump didn’t use it Twitter would have gone the way of Myspace already.

            Slogan use is a joke. Obama is famous for “Yes we can”, and “Change”. Neither of which meant anything. At least “Make America Great Again” has some actual policy behind it, whether or not you agree with it.

            Trump is not a “dictator”, as actual evidence proves otherwise. If he was, he wouldn’t be having any problems, and instead would act more like Obama in making unilateral decisions that go uncontested. Has Trumps “Muslim ban” been blocked? Y/N? Then he’s not a dictator, even though it clearly is his constitutional right to do so. Trump is more of a Jacksonian reform President. His whole platform is reform and economic revival. The negativity all comes from the politicians screwing America that need to be fired. Of course they’re going to complain that he’s upsetting the gravy train.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 3 years ago

            Oh I think unregulated does mean what I think it does, and I know perfectly well that good old Trump is not a dictator. We’ll have to agree to disagree on his merit, however. Enjoy the ride.

          • Froz
          • 3 years ago

          Free market without regulations always tends to create monopoly. Which is what happened here.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 3 years ago

            Monopolies enforce their power through government intervention. Fascism. Not free market.

            An unregulated free market would be Apple stealing the source code to windows, and competing with Microsoft using the same underlying OS. That’s not what happened here.

            Operating Systems are highly regulated by the government. We don’t even know the full extent, as our government could be contracting them to hijack telemetry functions as spyware. Not to say that is the sole function, but I’m sure the US GOV has access to it on request.

            In that scenario, this very much feels like some government intervention, as to ensure the majority of users are running an OS that spys on them continuously.

            • VincentHanna
            • 3 years ago

            Let me translate what you just said, into English, spoken by the rest of us.

            “fascism” = anything not anarchy
            “unregulated free market” = anarchy
            “running an OS that spys on them continuously” = umm, no idea. I heard that your microwave was spying on you also.

            You see, here is the main problem with everything you just said. Capitalism is an entire economic system, and yes, it is predicated on certain rules. Rules about property ownership. Enforcing those rules is the job of any government, whether fascist, or communist, or theocratic or autocratic, or whatever. The “unregulated” free market that you are talking about is not the economic vehicle pioneered by Adam Smith/Keynes/Hayak, what you are talking about is the absence of any form of government regulation, eg anarchy… which isn’t a thing. It’s the absence of an economic system. It’s a vacuum.

            A [b<]Capitalist[/b<] free market [b<]is[/b<] a regulated market in which laws about ownership are respected. This includes real property ownership, eg the means of production, as well as intellectual property ownership. This is what is meant by the "free market." [b<]It is not a free-for-all in which anyone can do anything without any regulatory enforcement whatsoever.[/b<] Theft of MSFT's property, for instance. Monopolies maintain their power through any means available to them. Corruption, Regulation, Cornering the market, Governmental Fiat. Anything. Has nothing to do with 'fascism/authoratarianism.'

      • crabjokeman
      • 3 years ago

      The 1950’s called. They want their witch-hunting charge back.

        • DoomGuy64
        • 3 years ago

        1950s? Ties to Russia? Tax returns? PC witch-hunts? This is happening current year.

        Right now, we are in the stages of a deep state cold war. The country has passed the point where it can be controlled by a media narrative of name calling and smear tactics. We either start seeing cooperation and reform, or there’s going to be another civil war.

        History repeats itself it you don’t learn from it.

          • Ninjitsu
          • 3 years ago

          yes but russia is anything but communist at this point.

          • Anonymous Coward
          • 3 years ago

          Not seeing civil war, just paralysis and decline into a 3rd world country. Oh well.

      • Meadows
      • 3 years ago

      If communism is so bad, why are you advocating it?

      • VincentHanna
      • 3 years ago

      WINDOWS ISN’T FREE.

      MSFT upgraded 7/8 owners to their new system for free, however, windows itself is not free. It’s not ad-driven, they aren’t selling your data (anymore than they were), they aren’t spying on you.

      They are building a modern, secure operating system and delivering to you the same functionality that they always have. Their business model, selling that OS to you hasn’t changed. At best, they have merely realized that the costs of supporting older OS choices are expensive and unnecessary, and that they will get just as much money under their new model of perpetual development as they did under their old model. This is because 99% of people upgrade their OS when they upgrade or replace their computer.

    • ClickClick5
    • 3 years ago

    I’m still on Vista SP0, what is happening?

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      The (computer) world as we know it is ending.

    • Fonbu
    • 3 years ago

    Must be an executive order signed by Satya Narayana Nadella himself….

      • Vaughn
      • 3 years ago

      Did you get that from your magic 8 ball?

        • LostCat
        • 3 years ago

        My sources say no.

        • tipoo
        • 3 years ago

        It’s actually an Irish proverb, I’ve heard lots of them say it.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      Of course. Gotta love that Nutella guy.

      • Fonbu
      • 3 years ago

      Its just…… so hard…… to let go of win7. I am sure many feel that way and we all resist change so profoundly.

        • morphine
        • 3 years ago

        People, and IT people in particularly, absolutely [i<]hate[/i<] change. The latter group (gerbils included) is particularly touchy.

          • kvndoom
          • 3 years ago

          Part of this is that MS has twice followed up something great with something underwhelming, then tried to remediate.

          XP was followed by Vista, which flopped because the PC world wasn’t ready for it when it released. Shame too, because at its end it was pretty damn good.

          Windows 7 was Vista with most of the problems fixed. It’s currently the “entrenched” OS like XP was.

          Windows 8 came along, and I just won’t go there. We all know how that went.

          Windows 10 was supposed to be to 8 what 7 was to Vista, but it really wasn’t (not to me anyway). I never got that “yes, this is what I’ve been waiting for!” feel from it.

          In time, Windows 7 will go away like XP did, and we can all joke about this instead of argue. But for now, history has repeated.

            • not@home
            • 3 years ago

            ^^ This. Plus the spyware and I am installing linux on my new box as I type this. If only Win 10 had been another Win 7.

        • Ifalna
        • 3 years ago

        Not really. Granted, I still miss the prettyness of Aero but ultimately: I stare at what is INSIDE of the windows and not at the border.

        At the end of the day, there is very little difference between 7 and 10. Both work fairly well with 10 having the advantage of being slimmer and faster.

    • jts888
    • 3 years ago

    As somebody still lagging on 7 for my Windows box, is it reasonable to get any sort of enterprise version of 10?

    Surely corporate customers won’t tolerate the most flagrant bullshit features like persistent activity tracking and serving ads directly from the shell or whatever.

    • tipoo
    • 3 years ago

    You could run Windows 8 on an Athlon XP if you really wanted. All of a sudden saying we have to tie silicon to a new Windows – in a post release patch, at that – is just obviously anti-consumer buffalo swallop .

    Microsoft seemed to be on an upwards goodwill curve after Ballmer, but 10 update after update seems to be wanting to break that trend.

      • the
      • 3 years ago

      I thought Windows 8.0 had SSE2, PAE, and NX bit as firm requirements.

        • tipoo
        • 3 years ago

        I think 8.1 did

        [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efb9y9kyJ4Q[/url<]

    • odizzido
    • 3 years ago

    Give us this day our steamOS and offer discounts for those who support vulkan. Lead us not to directx12, but deliver us from the evil that is microsoft.

    Can’t happen soon enough TBH.

    • brucethemoose
    • 3 years ago

    If you’re an accountant at Microsoft, this makes sense. Why pay a bunch of people to test old operating system updates on several new platforms?

    And, consequentially, if you’re a Microsoft lawyer/ PR worker, makes sense to put out a blanket statement like that. It prevents any PR disasters, or alternatively (if they push out updates anyway) it gives them the right to yank any disastrous untested updates from those systems if need be.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      They don’t need to support an old OS. They don’t need to test an old OS with new hardware.

      But when they ‘instruct’ an old OS to display error messages and warnings when a new CPU is detected (because they know everyone will eventually get new hardware for whatever reason) to push the user to get the latest Windows version (which is notorious for its questionable behavior), that’s quite a different matter. And quite frankly, unethical, IMHO.

        • kruky
        • 3 years ago

        Quite frankly it’s unethical to suggest that the latest Windows version is notorious for its questionable behavior, IMHO.

          • ronch
          • 3 years ago

          It’s not unethical, it’s just not politically correct to criticize anything in the world today anymore.

    • DoomGuy64
    • 3 years ago

    lol, “support”. It’s a x86 cpu that should be capable of running a 32-bit OS if you were so inclined. The older versions are just devoid of features included in the newer OS. Compatibility should still be 100%. No reason to block updates, other than a business one.

    Microsoft is creating it’s new walled garden ecosystem. Maybe if linux distro’s weren’t so damn consumer unfriendly, there would be some competition.

    There’s probably going to be hacks for this, but that doesn’t mean we should let MS get away with it either. The only question is, how? Windows 7 is getting old, and the pushback is probably going to be minimal.

      • Meadows
      • 3 years ago

      Windows 7 is now [b<][i<]older[/i<][/b<] than Windows XP was back when it started becoming really, really embarrassing to cling to.

    • EndlessWaves
    • 3 years ago

    [quote<]Flipping the subject on its head, it could be argued that at least Windows 8.1 could be supported on those CPUs, since its support ends in 2023, while Windows 7's EOL is reasonably close in 2020.[/quote<] Those are the [i<]extended[/i<] support dates for security patches. The mainstream dates that are generally when Microsoft stops making nonsecurity updates are the start of 2015 and the start of 2018. And the knowledgebase page uses the phrase 'Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 devices that have a seventh generation or a later generation processor [b<]may[/b<] no longer be able to scan or download updates through Windows Update or Microsoft Update' So I'm guessing this is some sort of system builder assistance feature to discourage users from installing old operating systems and then calling the OEM's helpline to moan that things aren't working. It doesn't look like Microsoft are planning a blanket ban. It seems like a much less aggressive solution than locked down UEFI or similar that prevent any other OS being installed.

      • psuedonymous
      • 3 years ago

      Gettoutahere with your reasonableness! And don’t you know you’re supposed to spell Microsoft as ‘M$’?!

      In all seriousness though, so many people seem absolutely certain that Windows 10 is monitoring their every click and uploading all their documents to Microsoft (despite there not being a shred of evidence to support it), but maintain the bizarre belief that the best way to avoid that is to instead use…. Windows. Protip: your OS controls everything. If you don’t trust your OS vendor, you’re already OWNed.

      I for one am not in the least bit saddened at Windows 7 being forcibly prevented from becoming another Windows XP. The faster old unpatched boxes drop off the net, the better.

    • Welch
    • 3 years ago

    Yeah, by all means go for stability and development on new hardware with new software. Just don’t actively be thwarting the attempts of people who WANT to run Windows 7/8.1 on newer hardware. Although I’m sure it isn’t much, it actually takes effort to block people. Put that effort somewhere useful.

      • Voldenuit
      • 3 years ago

      [quote<]Put that effort somewhere useful.[/quote<] They are. This is the best they've come up with to shore up numbers for Windows Store, since none of the other ideas helped, not even making games exclusives and giving free stuff. Their latest idea? [url=https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2017/03/09/playable-ads-acquire-users-love-engage-app/#EDYmOqP4yW6sLhIf.97<]Playable Ads[/url<].

      • Wirko
      • 3 years ago

      MS has put a lot of effort into breaking Windows 7 updates on ANY hardware. I don’t think there’s anything left to break specifically for new PCs.

      • Blytz
      • 3 years ago

      Or be active in thwarting and don’t bitch when people pirate it because they don’t want to shell out coin for software that doesn’t support their hardware.

      Remember when hardware dictated what you could do with software not the other way around.

      • cybot_x1024
      • 3 years ago

      Unfortunately it may not be useful to the consumer but it is useful to the execs because it pushes the profits up because people have to buy new licenses.

        • JustAnEngineer
        • 3 years ago

        I didn’t pay a dime to get Windows 10. Microsoft gave me an OS upgrade for [i<]free[/i<]. You should have taken advantage of their generosity when you had the chance. :-p

          • kvndoom
          • 3 years ago

          It can still be had for free (assistive technology upgrade). I just don’t want it on my personal-use computers. I “upgraded” all the ones the kids use so I don’t have to tend to them as much, but I can’t deal with that much ugly as a daily driver on my own rig.

          I’m just fine with my Haswell rig until 2020. I’ll be one of the ones kicking and screaming.

      • PixelArmy
      • 3 years ago

      It’s a CYA thing.

      They don’t want to be responsible in the event they push updates that for some reason don’t work on Kaby/Ryzen/etc. (don’t get me wrong, I think the likelihood of this is pretty low, but it might not be 0%). Note: this includes the entire platform as well.

      You’re assuming the effort taken to block people would be better used for some cool new feature, when in reality, if they didn’t block people, that effort would have to be spent coding for and testing on these new platforms.

    • Waco
    • 3 years ago

    Microsoft is trying really hard to be a pain in the ass.

    Unsupported is different from actively blocked. I hope this doesn’t roll out, even though I think moving to 10 was an upgrade.

      • Neutronbeam
      • 3 years ago

      Remind me please–since when did MSFT have to TRY to be a PITA? It’s got more PITA than a Greek restaurant.

        • Redocbew
        • 3 years ago

        Just because they’re willing to acknowledge the existence of other operating systems doesn’t mean they’ll acknowledge other operating systems called Windows, I guess.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        It’s just odd since they were on “good behavior” for a while. Actively blocking things is asinine to a level that MS usually just doesn’t bother with.

        • nanoflower
        • 3 years ago

        Since they released Windows 1.0. I don’t recall them being quite so obnoxious in the old DOS days. 🙂

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This