Updates for Windows 7 and 8.1 on Kaby and Ryzen are now blocked

Well, the day has arrived. We previously reported that Microsoft had plans to block users of Kaby Lake and Ryzen systems from installing or updating Windows 7 and Windows 8.1. The company has gone ahead with the plan. Owners of systems with those CPUs inside should now see the error screen below when using Windows Update. The company notes that users may also receive an "unknown error" with code 80240037.

This move was initially announced back in August of 2016. All operating systems have to drop support for older hardware sometime, and Microsoft's actions are far from unexpected. The decision of what versions of Windows to drop may be the subject of some contention, though. Although the decision was more-or-less foreseeable with regard to Windows 7 ever since its mainstream support ended back in 2015, those who would prefer Windows 8.1 or didn't take up the free offer to upgrade to Windows 10 might be left fuming.

Owners of Skylake systems with perfectly-running Windows 7 installations are in a bit of a weird place. Microsoft will support Windows 7 or 8.1 on those systems only until a year and change from now, on July 17, 2018—a deadline that was extended one year from the original date. After that, those systems will only receive critical security updates until the OSes reach the end of their extended support periods—January 14, 2020 for Windows 7 and January 10, 2023 for Windows 8.1.

However, some OEM Skylake systems from 16 manufacturers will still apparently receive updates for those older OSes until Microsoft's regular end-of-life dates for the software. Microsoft still recommends that "these systems be upgraded to Windows 10 as soon as possible."

Comments closed
    • kvndoom
    • 3 years ago

    Just putting it out there that there is still no financial barrier to upgrading to Windows 10. I fully understand why those who don’t like it, don’t like it (raises hand), but don’t gimp yourself out of security patches if your CPU got blacklisted!

    [url<]https://www.microsoft.com/en-ca/accessibility/windows10upgrade[/url<] Still works. Just used it last night for one laptop. Will use it again today for another. ...this coming from someone not fond of 10, who will still use 7 on my main (Haswell) computer until 2020.

    • wingless
    • 3 years ago

    TO ADD:

    I’ve read that Intel and AMD want to eliminate some of the legacy instruction sets in CPUs starting around 2020. This will make CPUs less complex, more efficient, and ultimately faster, but the biggest barrier was the OS.

    This artificial segmentation is a necessary step to accomplish this goal.

    It sucks now, but in a few years we won’t care and we’ll be better off for it.

      • synthtel2
      • 3 years ago

      That would be a good excuse for MS to drop Win8.1 support for CPUs released in 2020. For Win7 it shouldn’t matter in the slightest, since its EOL is January 2020 anyway. Either way, dropping Sky/Kaby/Ryzen support in 2017/18 does nothing to help that later transition.

    • torquer
    • 3 years ago

    Hardware Enthusiast: Person who reads tech blogs and websites, who enjoys reading about, researching, and using bleeding edge hardware/software

    Hardware Enthusiast Commenter: Same as the person above, but bitches and whines to high heaven like a little sissy girl whenever Company X makes it harder or impossible to use older hardware or ancient software, particularly Operating Systems

    This crap is second only to fanboyism and unnecessary political discussions in terms of the worst parts about comment threads on tech websites.

    You guys need to get over your silly emotional attachment to old operating systems. Here’s your options:

    1. Upgrade
    2. Run it in a VM
    3. Switch to some other OS
    4. Stick with your now much more insecure old OS and you can wear it like some badge of honor/stupidity that you still run XP/7/whatever while the rest of us still live in the present

      • synthtel2
      • 3 years ago

      [quote<]enjoys reading about, researching, and using bleeding edge hardware/software[/quote<] Reading about and researching the bleeding edge is cool regardless, but using, not so much. Regressions happen. A lot of the software you'll find open on my desktop would be decently recognizable from the 90s (*box WM), 80s (Norton/Midnight Commander), or even 70s (vi/vim). This isn't because they're better in concept than anything anyone can come up with in the modern era (they aren't - being good enough to still be around might just be luck), but because the developers don't feel the need to rewrite (and break) everything at the drop of a hat. Over the decades, they've become bulletproof and polished (not quite the right word, but I can't think of a better one) in ways that more aggressive software development practices could never hope to match. Where many see stagnation, I see projects that have actually been seen through to their full potential. For-profit companies may always feel pressure to have something new and shiny to show the stockholders. They are pushed to innovation, and finesse takes a back seat for as long as the lack of it isn't dire for all to see. There are places for this, especially when trying to get computers to do things that they haven't previously been able to do. When the task at hand is already well-known, it's a tradeoff: the innovation may (or may not) speed up the workflow, but it will almost certainly impede finesse in one way or another, which will slow down the workflow. OSes and desktop environments have fairly well-known tasks and seem to find themselves on the wrong side of this often. I have and have had a great number of complaints with Microsoft throughout their history, but I think balancing innovation against finesse in their UX is a thing they've spent a long time doing exceptionally well. With Win95, they knew they had something good on their hands, and from there through Win7, they mostly refined it rather than reinventing. They used some bling, because the marketing department has got to have something to work with, but they mostly put it places where it didn't matter. By the time Win7 rolled around, the UX was masterful. Unfortunately, even ignoring 8.1 and early 10, it's clear from the 7 -> current 10 jump that MS has ceased to value finesse like they once did. There's no singular thing about Win10 that drives me away from it. I could certainly point at plenty of individual things I don't like, but no one of them would be a deal breaker. Instead, it's a death by a thousand cuts, and I think the underlying cause of about half of those cuts can be traced back to the subject of this post. The posts you're complaining about are exactly what I'd expect if people think that Windows is going downhill, and it's no mystery to me in what way(s) Windows might be going downhill. People seem to have very different tolerances for various kinds of software jankiness, and I expect that's the biggest disconnect on this page. I don't much mind the labels you assign or don't assign to me, but somehow I doubt that I'm not a hardware or software enthusiast. πŸ˜‰

        • torquer
        • 3 years ago

        Theres nothing wrong with sticking with something old because you prefer it. What is ludicrous is moaning and wailing once those choices become self limiting from a hardware/software/support perspective. If you’re fine with the limits, then great. Otherwise, its a little like choosing to keep your old Ford pickup from the 70s and complaining about the fuel mileage.

        Of course its a free country/internet depending on who you ask, so people are welcome to bitch and whine and moan and complain. And I’m free to call it out for the silliness that it is. Tech marches on and if we haven’t figured that out in the last 30 years then perhaps its time for a new hobby.

          • synthtel2
          • 3 years ago

          I’d agree, if “self limiting” were really the right term for what’s going on here. If there were a legit technical reason for this to have problems with new hardware, then the Kaby/Ryzen lockout would make sense. There isn’t, and it doesn’t. That said, I couldn’t get too worked up about that one alone, because at least they warned us. With Skylake OTOH, we can see plain as day that they’ll be making and testing the updates, and they just decided not to give them to us. There’s nothing “self” limiting about that, it’s Microsoft limiting it in violation of their promise of support through January 2020.

    • BaronMatrix
    • 3 years ago

    Maybe the crazy bastages shoudl have listened with Win8… It was a universally hated UI and they doubled down…

    And HAVE zero phone share to show for this monstrosity…

    • cybot_x1024
    • 3 years ago

    Imagine if your cellphone carrier blocked your text messages because they noticed you are running the latest OS on an old phone and you won’t upgrade to that new device they are offering on contract.

    Microsoft is becoming really brave with some of these shady tactics

      • LostCat
      • 3 years ago

      Or imagine if a cellphone carrier no longer offered updates for a cellphone because they decided not to support it…oh wait, they do that all the time.

    • Aveon
    • 3 years ago

    Remember those logos on the Motherboard that used to say ” Windows 10 ready”

    It’s time the manufacturers changes it to “Supports Only Windows 10”.

    • Cyco-Dude
    • 3 years ago

    eat shit, m$.

      • Meadows
      • 3 years ago

      Cue a Penny Arcade comic strip.

        • synthtel2
        • 3 years ago

        I’d say that to Nadella’s face (embedded in a proper rant about how pointlessly anti-user this is, if that makes any difference).

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    Observation: folks seem to be divided about Windows 10 as Americans are divided between pro-Trump and anti-Trump.

    Man is truly crazy. Sometimes I wish people are much much friendlie and innocent.

    • LostCat
    • 3 years ago

    Out of curiousity, did Intel or AMD ever claim those processors supported anything but win10? I don’t think AMD did with Ryzen anyway.

    • herbcanter
    • 3 years ago

    Microsoft still recommends that “these systems be upgraded to Windows 10 as soon as possible.”

    Yeah , good luck with that , not going to happen.

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    It used to be that upgrading to a new OS encouraged people to buy new hardware because their hardware is too slow to run the new OS. But in this case buying a new CPU and mobo such as Kaby or Zen means you should get the latest OS. It’s so backwards. The latest CPUs no doubt support everything the OS needs. And look at how all those game devs are patching their code to fully support Ryzen. Microsoft is doing the exact opposite. And to think they’re the ones providing the OS. They’re supposed to be the ‘big brother’ here, but instead they’re being the big bully.

    • cheesyking
    • 3 years ago

    Anyone know if this only affects an OS installed on actual hardware or whether it’s also a problem in a VM?

      • Shobai
      • 3 years ago

      [url=http://winaero.com/blog/new-cpu-lock-windows-restrictive/<]WinAero[/url<] is reporting that this will affect VMs.

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    Boycott Microsoft. Nuff said.

      • synthtel2
      • 3 years ago

      Already on it. πŸ˜‰ If you’re as annoyed about this as I am, join me! MS does whatever the f— they want because they know most people won’t leave. How do you think they’d behave in a world where consumers have the will to not give money to companies that don’t deserve it?

      The people most affected by this block are probably the same crowd that’s most likely to drop Windows entirely anyway, making it a great opportunity to show them that their actions can lose them users.

        • Redocbew
        • 3 years ago

        I had pretty much jumped ship already. I can’t get away from it completely, but the only time I boot into windows now is for games which don’t have a quick and easy linux client. If GPU pass through wasn’t such a pain in the neck I probably wouldn’t be running windows directly on the hardware at all.

      • tipoo
      • 3 years ago

      If it weren’t for vidja games πŸ™

        • synthtel2
        • 3 years ago

        Other than the latest and greatest AAA titles, gaming works really well these days. For some people, no recent AAA is a deal-breaker, but if not, you’ve got native support from a nice majority of recent non-AAA stuff (it’s easy for devs with Unity and UE4), native support from a surprising scattering of other stuff (like I was just playing BL2 lately), and wine to fill in historical and low-end stuff (DX10/11 support is still forthcoming, but it works on a pretty heavy majority of DX9 stuff). Wine is becoming less of a PITA at an impressive rate; it’s still no solution for the average joe, but this being a tech site, I think most people reading this would find it quite workable.

        (I’ve been doing all my gaming (which is lots) on Linux for four-ish years now.)

        • lycium
        • 3 years ago

        Visual Studio is the main thing preventing me from running Linux. For the odd bit of gaming I’d be happy to dual boot back into Windows, but I spend basically all my life in Visual Studio and there simply isn’t a decent replacement yet.

        How the “<insert current year> is the year of Linux on the desktop!” crowd haven’t caught on to this massive gap in development environments is beyond me. Vim/Emacs/GDB is not acceptable, CLion is basically exactly what we want but it’s pretty expensive for non-opensource use and still super new / having its teething pains.

          • BaronMatrix
          • 3 years ago

          Same here… And that would be an issue if it were not full screen… MS screwed th epooch so hard the damn thing ran away…

          But with Visual Studio Code you can use Linux… And to think they KNEW months before Win 10 that they had almost zero phone share and even with a touch screen laptop I still use a mouse and KB…

          Win 10 is the ONLY reason I didn’t buy my Ryzen system… I could have put a 480 in for now and gotten a Vega later for mGPU… But I hate it on a 14″ laptop so my 3 LCDs woudl hate it…

          I RDP into my laptop and it looks HORRIBLE side by side with Win7…

          SCREW MICROSOFT… They took a perfectly good WPF and ruined it with crappy Modern UI and UWP… I tried a Modern version of WinZip… DON’T…

      • End User
      • 3 years ago

      So kill your platform of choice?

        • synthtel2
        • 3 years ago

        Aside from the fact that it doesn’t look like Windows is his platform of choice, companies with >80% market share behave differently from companies with <50% market share. If their market share was at 50%, I think it’s safe to say we wouldn’t be in this situation.

    • cheesyking
    • 3 years ago

    I’m curious to see how they handle doing things the other way round… “Unsupported hardware, your computer is too old to run the latest version of windows.”

    If 10 really is the “last” version of windows then presumably it will have to happen one day.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      Well it sort of was like that before, when people find the latest versions of Windows too demanding and slow on their computers and they were encouraged to upgrade their hardware. Everytime a new Windows version came out hardware makers were optimistic about selling new stuff. There weren’t any error messages; things happened naturally. But this time Microsoft is ARTIFICIALLY displaying errors prompting people to get Windows 10. It’s the OPPOSITE and it’s ARTIFICIAL. They’re doing everything they can to make everyone get Windows 10. They’re so desperate that they even gave Windows 10 for FREE! How desperate is that? Can’t they take a hint that if something was already free and people still didn’t like to get it, they really don’t want it? Yeah of course they know that but they don’t care. They’ll FORCE you to get it. Good grief, Windows 10 must be the Mark of the beast!

        • Hinton
        • 3 years ago

        I like that wall of nonsense already have been edited once.

        Imagine what it looked like before.

          • ronch
          • 3 years ago

          I see almost all your posts here are in reply to my posts. You are like a tick that won’t come off, you know.

        • bill94el
        • 3 years ago

        Right on! Well said.

        • Mr Bill
        • 3 years ago

        MS did also do that in early releases of windows. If you were using DR DOS or some other DOS clone, windows would generate a FUD warning that the DOS version was wrong and Windows might not work properly.

    • watzupken
    • 3 years ago

    I sense MS will be getting themselves in trouble, particularly the fact that Windows 8.1 is still supposed to be within the support period and MS is preventing new hardware to be used on it. It is also a very desperate move to try to drive up Windows 10 adoption.

    As much as I hope support for Win 7 to continue, it is after all a decade old now.

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      Not quite yet. Windows 7 is only eight years old at the end of 2007.

        • ronch
        • 3 years ago

        Er, I think you meant 2017.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      Think this is enough to spur a class action lawsuit?

        • Hinton
        • 3 years ago

        My first instinct was that surely Microsofts lawyers would have looked into this.

        Then I remember that they made a deal with the EU that required them to have that browser selection screen, and then forgot to include it with Windows 7 SP1, with predictable results.

        They do tend to sometimes fuck up.

    • albundy
    • 3 years ago

    More like the Affordable MicrosoftCare Act. You know, forcing people to buy your worthless garbage at a ripoff price that benefits nobody.

    • dyrdak
    • 3 years ago

    I’ve asked this before and I don’t see any answers in the discussion (possibly just an issue my query). Has anyone considered servicing the image offline? Surely this would work for imaging new systems (it’s unlikely that the hardware was really not supported). With any luck this could be tried on online images (running system).
    OTOH, good reason to save money and stick to tried and true hardware. And I’ll be laughing when some Taiwan mobo makers will release BIOS with option to misrepresent the hardware (though this one may not be easy to pull off).

    • Chrispy_
    • 3 years ago

    See, I wouldn’t even mind this if W10 had evolved to become a superior option to W7, but here we are two years after W10 launched and the fundamental requirement of the OS – to launch installed programs – is still completely broken.

    [url=http://windows.intowindows.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/These-results-may-be-incomplete-message-in-Start-menu-Windows-10_thumb.png<]"These results may be incomplete"[/url<] appears to be the default state for any W10 machine I encounter. You type something obvious like "uninstall" and it doesn't even find matches to uninstall software from the control panel. Calling the start menu even a "menu" is an insult to all menus, and don't get me started on the limitation to taskbar jumplists, the flat UI, the usage-tracking, or the constant resetting of any personalisations every few months thanks to a major update.

      • dyrdak
      • 3 years ago

      It’s a menu and you’ve got served;)

    • Mad_Dane
    • 3 years ago

    I call BS, pure pure BS, this is just a fabricated obstacle to ram their spyware 10 down out throats!

    • Fonbu
    • 3 years ago

    I don’t know much about law. But I am wondering if this move by Microsoft is entirely within the bounds of the law in every country that they have implemented this in? Like consumer protection laws? Not sure if the EULA included with Win7 and win8.1 makes note to this situation? Seems companies do make amendments to their legal material to get away with stuff like this….

      • DancinJack
      • 3 years ago

      no.

    • maroon1
    • 3 years ago

    Good move from microsoft

    This will prevent stubborn people from sticking to an outdated OS. We need to move forward. As windows 10 user, I would tell you than it is by far much better than windows 7 in every possible way

      • End User
      • 3 years ago

      I agree 110%. The users who stick with old versions of Windows are doing the community a disservice.

        • D@ Br@b($)!
        • 3 years ago

        Think you both are trolling, still voted you down.

          • End User
          • 3 years ago

          Not at all. I strongly recommend Windows 7 users upgrade/buy Windows 10 ASAP.

          • jihadjoe
          • 3 years ago

          It’s how you show appreciation for a good troll!

          • Meadows
          • 3 years ago

          So if someone disagrees with you, they’re trolling?

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            This is how people (including some admins) roll around here.

            • mcarson09
            • 3 years ago

            It makes this place toxic. Heaven forbid you say anything contrary about AMD here.

        • ronch
        • 3 years ago

        I disagree 120%.

          • End User
          • 3 years ago

          Are you still running Windows 7?

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            Yes and for good reasons.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            Well, your platform of choice is suffering because of your choice.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            Windows has always been fragmented. Same with Android. Same with everything. You simply can’t expect everyone to buy the latest things companies put out.

            The PC is all about choice. It’s not supposed to be a walled garden like Apple is. This is the PC segment’s main appeal.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            So this is really about $?

            7 is a dead OS. Move on already.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            We. Don’t. Want. Windows. 10.

            What part of that is hard to understand?

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            You think a 7 year old OS is better than Windows 10?

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            You think newer = better?

            • VincentHanna
            • 3 years ago

            Better = better.

            Windows 10 is newer, more secure, faster, easier to administrate, more stable, includes new features like DX12, easier to repair, better optimized for high-res screens, is compatible with bash code, etc.

            ^^ better.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            I think better = better.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            What a smart thing to say. I’m impressed!!

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            You should be.

            • Hinton
            • 3 years ago

            I understand that you don’t want it.

            I am not sure I’ll ever be able to understand an irrational luddite though, so your motivations will confuse me forever.

            I btw. like the “we” part. No, you’re not part of something bigger. Its just you. You’re not connected by some sort of bond of other people also refusing to upgrade.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            Why do you have such a big problem with folks like us who simply don’t want to upgrade? Why are you so affected as to imply we’re some sort of crazy group? We’ve heard enough about Windows 10 that we don’t like so we choose not to get it. If you like it, go ahead. We’re not calling you stupid or anything derogatory. If anything, you’re shifting the focus here from Microsoft’s dick move to yourself. Don’t be a dick, ok? Not calling you a dick, just saying don’t be a dick.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            You’re the one who took it up a notch to 120%.

            Thurrott sorted out most/all of what you’ve “heard”.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            It was more like a joke. But this new Hinton guy is like a tick that won’t come off. Seems he’s picked my head to suck on.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            Well, you are still using Windows 7.

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            By the way some people around here are acting, you’d think Win7 users do nothing but kick puppies all day.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            Using Windows 7 is far, far worse than kicking puppies.

            • Krogoth
            • 3 years ago

            No, it is not.

            It is not even remotely close.

            Windows 7 makes sense for older hardware platforms (which is why support endures for these platforms until extended EOL at 2020).

            It doesn’t make as much as for Skylake and newer though as the hardware will outlast Windows 7 extended period.

            • End User
            • 3 years ago

            Windows 10 runs decently on a Core 2 Duo – especially if you upgrade to an SSD – so we are looking back 10+ years. If someone is running something older than that then they would be better off using their smartphone and a chromecast. My smartphone/cromecast replaced a 2012 Mac mini.

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            Do you intend to explain why (which you can’t), or just bash it more like usual?

            • Redocbew
            • 3 years ago

            You. Don’t. Want. Windows 10. Plus, your reasons are personal, not technical. I probably have some of the same reasons so don’t get me wrong here, but I recognize the difference, and unlike you I have only a limited supply of outrage to spend on these things.

            Maybe I’ll start looking more closely at Mono also. Being able to work on .net projects from Linux would be nice if it works out well.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            Regardless of my reasons, along with the reasons of a ton of folks here who don’t like Windows 10 (have you tried bugging them too or am I your favorite target?) the point is Microsoft is being a jerk here. This behavior is unprecedented in the history of Windows and it’s really ticking people off. So what’s your beef with that?

            • Redocbew
            • 3 years ago

            I still have no idea who you’re talking about with “us” and “people”, but in any case let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that complaining about this actually matters.

            A while ago I saw a homeless guy on a street corner with a doorknob in one hand and a sock monkey in the other screaming “I KNOW THE GATEWAY TO HEAVEN!”. Despite being rather memorable nobody really paid attention to him. I can’t help but think that’s kind of where we’re headed here with all this being a hurricane in a teacup. I don’t personally care for windows 10 either, but I don’t see the point of getting all worked up about it.

            Chill dude, it’ll be alright. Really.

            • ludi
            • 3 years ago

            Good news: you can continue using 7 on pretty much anything except a brand new Kaby Lake or Ryzen processor.

            • MOSFET
            • 3 years ago

            Windows is Windows. Wow, so much differentiation.

            • Meadows
            • 3 years ago

            Name one.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            Don’t tell me you haven’t come across Windows 10 horror stories. Google is your friend.

            • Meadows
            • 3 years ago

            How are other people’s “stories” relevant to my user experience? My user experience has been good, on the whole better than with Windows 7.

            • ronch
            • 3 years ago

            We’ve had a Windows 10 installation and we don’t like it. You like it, that’s fine. We don’t say you’re a bunch of nuts or something though we air our discontent against Microsoft for this dick move. But you folks on the other camp resort to derogatory remarks against US. How cool is that??

            • Pholostan
            • 3 years ago

            Security is a very good reason NOT to be running an old, outdated OS with numerous known security flaws. Latest wikileaks exposed a number of new ones. Automated bots/scripts can wreck your system just ’cause it is such a security nightmare, nobody needs to target you specifically.

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            OSes in general are like that, Win10 included. For most people, Win7 still won’t get worse until 2020.

            The WL stuff already got patched before release. The timing was hella weird (but that might get R&P), but the only way you’d be vulnerable to it is if you’re not installing updates.

      • mcnabney
      • 3 years ago

      There is no Windows Media Center under Win10. So no tuning in live TV or CableCard broadcasts without clinging to the tech in Win7/8.

        • dyrdak
        • 3 years ago

        This – media center and other nice featured replaced by crApps. btw, there’s unofficial WMC pack for download that seems to work fine but the program guide, I’ve only had so much time to research to make the PG work. Pesky telemetry gotchas all over the place plus jarring experience when you have to sign in to new systems and these keep installing stuff (while you wait) only so you have more crud to remove. And no, I do not plan to sign in to my PC with MS account (the same way I do not sign in to Chrome just because Google would like me to). It bugs me that ISP has so much insight into my traffic. It’s just crazy to let MS see every little thing that goes on my local system.

          • mcnabney
          • 3 years ago

          Yeah, I have haxored WMC onto my Win10 PCs, but I still have one Win7 PC that does all of my recordings since it still can get the program guide.
          P.S. – you need a VPN

        • Hinton
        • 3 years ago

        Windows Media Center is available for Windows 10.

        [url<]http://downloads.techradar.com/downloads/windows-media-center-fur-windows-10[/url<] A lot of the people who use the WMC as an excuse, will just come up with another one though. Often discussing with luddites is like engaging with a conspiracy nut. Not you specificially.

      • herbcanter
      • 3 years ago

      Lay off the heavy drugs my friend , you don’t have a freaking clue. No OS is outdated if it does everything and more that you need it to do and Win 7 does exactly that .

      • BenBasson
      • 3 years ago

      For most people I know, it’s always sufficient to take the latest version of Windows at the time that they build new hardware. I’ve literally never met anyone who has upgraded an installed instance of Windows until the Windows 10 free upgrade thing came along.

      I think you’re confusing active “stubbornness” with “not giving a shit”.

      • BaronMatrix
      • 3 years ago

      Sit the two UIs side by side and tell me which one came out in 2016…

    • yeeeeman
    • 3 years ago

    So what? I already disabled windows update when I freshly installed Windows 7.
    All updates are just BS in my opinion and unnecesary. So…they can block whatever they want.

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    So did older versions of Windows like XP and Vista intentionally check if your CPU is the latest and greatest and then block updates if you’ve got a Ryzen or 7700K? For that matter, will installing XP on a Ryzen system generate these same errors? No. This is purely a **** move by Microsoft to force people to adopt Windows 10. It’s all about profit the way Windows 10 was designed for, whatever ways those may be.

      • LostCat
      • 3 years ago

      XP and Vista aren’t getting any updates to begin with.

        • ronch
        • 3 years ago

        Nonetheless this sort of thing never happened before even when those OSes still received updates.

          • LostCat
          • 3 years ago

          I’m just saying it’s irrelevant/stating the obvious. This is indeed the first time it’s happened on any MS platform. Including platforms that are no longer supported so it can’t affect them.

          • herbcanter
          • 3 years ago

          It’s MS self destructing and they don’t even realize it , a beautiful thing for sure , they deserve it.

        • smilingcrow
        • 3 years ago

        Of course they did, they had service packs and security updates which are all updates just not in the way that 10 rolls them out (and over you).
        So this stops you from installing 7/8.1 from scratch as you can’t access Windows Update even for security updates.
        So this is a radical change of policy and the more desperate MS get the less appealing they are and the more people jump ship and the more desperate they get.
        They have been on a downward trend for years and 10 is the tipping point for me.
        I plan to move to Linux for general usage after 8.1 and keep Windows for Music Production.
        They have already lost my Office 365 subscription and XBox Music subscription so they are on the way to being marginalised and my next laptop may be a Linxux/Hackintosh dual boot.

    • jackbomb
    • 3 years ago

    You DICK!
    /spicoli

    • Meadows
    • 3 years ago

    I didn’t know Kaby Lake and Ryzen were “older hardware”. Must’ve missed a few articles.

    • evilpaul
    • 3 years ago

    This is a dick move on Microsoft’s part, but people need to start using modern software already. My elderly parents can use Windows 10 just fine, but tech enthusiasts can’t manage

      • Taxythingy
      • 3 years ago

      Can’t != don’t want to. But you knew that already.

      • herbcanter
      • 3 years ago

      Your elderly parents use Win 10 , thats mind boggling , i have yet to run into that . All love Win 7 to death and are staying with it.

    • spiritwalker2222
    • 3 years ago

    I wondering if there doing this for corporations too? Many large corporations are still using Windows 7.

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      It is primary reason why MS is doing it. They are trying to get wean SMB and corporations away from 7/2008 R2 ecology to avoid a repeat of XP/2003 ecology.

      Average Joe users aren’t affected by it because they use whatever OS is loaded with their OEM system. Skylake-era OEM PCs and newer are already loaded with Windows 10.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        Except for the ones that aren’t.

      • Ethyriel
      • 3 years ago

      Yup, and Lenovo is continuing to offer Skylake Thinkpads and Thinkcentres side by side with Kaby Lake for at least this generation because of it. I think Dell is doing the same, don’t know about HP. This is what’s accelerating us to a Q1 18 Win 10 rollout, and it’s going to be ugly.

      • G8torbyte
      • 3 years ago

      Yep, my federal job network is on Win7 Enterprise. With all the network security restrictions in place, patching etc it becomes a drag on productivity with frequent connection issues. Not much you can do as a regular client user. The Win10 migration is announced with a Jan’18 completion target. Hopefully it’ll be easier for the IT system admins since they are constantly working enterprise work tickets.

    • StealthR6
    • 3 years ago

    Yet a 4790k or 4770k is fully supported, stay classy Microsoft.

    Perhaps we are viewing this all wrong. Maybe we need to stop buying new Intel and AMD CPU’s, perhaps than those two would put “pressure” on Microsoft to stop this nonsense?

    Supported or not I’m staying with Win7 on my 2500k, there take that AMD/Intel! /sarcasm

    • nerdrage
    • 3 years ago

    Does the update blocking include Windows installed on VMs? Meaning, if someone were to install Win7 or Win8.1 in a VM that happens to be hosted on Kaby/Ryzen hardware, will updates still be blocked?

    Or is Windows smart enough to see that it’s running on a virtual processor, even though it can identify that the underlying processor is Kaby/Ryzen?

      • Redocbew
      • 3 years ago

      Probably depends on the software you’re using. My Win7 VM running in virtualbox correctly shows it’s running on an i3 6100, but I know KVM has a bunch of options for specifying what features of the CPU get reported to guests, because it has to know how to migrate VMs from one server to another.

    • egon
    • 3 years ago

    Cutting off Skylake that soon comes as somewhat of a suprise given motherboard manufacturers are still releasing new hardware that officially supports Windows 7/8.1 with Skylake.

    But it’s downright shady in relation to Windows 8.1. It can be argued Windows 7 was past its mainstream support period at the time of Skylake’s release, but Windows 8 was [url=https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/13853/windows-lifecycle-fact-sheet<]well within it[/url<], and still is until January 2018 - after which security updates were meant to be part of the deal until 2023.

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      Not really.

      Microsoft cut off support for 2000 with Socket AM2 Athlon 64 and Core 2 platforms back in the day. They killed 9x support for anything newer than Socket A and Socket 423.

      I think people’s expectations were distorted by Windows XP’s unusually long product lifespan. Windows 7 is about to go EOL in two years. Why should MS bother to continue to provide support for hardware platforms that are going to last far beyond that? There’s no economic incentive. Microsoft even gave Windows 7 and 8/8.1 users a grace period of nearly a year to do a “free” upgrade. You snooze, you lose.

        • egon
        • 3 years ago

        Do you mean Microsoft selectively blocked the installation of updates for those versions of Windows, on those platforms, prior to the end of their support periods?

        I don’t really trust my memory going that far back, though I have the sense OS support on various platforms was viewed more in terms of hardware drivers than security updates.

        • Taxythingy
        • 3 years ago

        They might have cut off support for 2000, but it installed, patched and ran just fine on the last P35 / Core 2 system I tried. No middle finger splash screen there.

          • LostCat
          • 3 years ago

          Can’t really block updates that don’t exist.

    • south side sammy
    • 3 years ago

    Last year I methodically purchased new hardware that will run XP/Vista/W7 and reformatted all my machines and cloned the drives and cloned them again. Except for a few motherboards I’d like to get my hands on before they dry up…….. I’m set for life. I don’t need W10. Microsoft needs W10……( insert lewd finger gesture here )!!

    • oldog
    • 3 years ago

    An April 2015 Tim Cook quote seems appropriate here…

    “I think it’s different. Part of the reason Microsoft ran into an issue was that they didn’t want to walk away from legacy stuff.

    Apple has always had the discipline to make the bold decision to walk away. We walked away from the floppy disk when that was popular with many users.”

    [url<]https://www.fastcompany.com/3042435/steves-legacy-tim-looks-ahead[/url<]

      • LoneWolf15
      • 3 years ago

      Relevant, but Microsoft had EOL dates listed on support of their operating systems. Basically, they’re not living up to those agreements if you have specific hardware.

      I don’t mind Microsoft instituting new rules in how they operate, as long as they don’t change rules in the middle of the game.

        • oldog
        • 3 years ago

        Agreed, but some folks need to be dragged off the plane.

      • Fieryphoenix
      • 3 years ago

      Courage!

    • Krogoth
    • 3 years ago

    This is a non-issue in the grand scheme of things. You really should be upgrading your software if you intend on building system under a new hardware platform.

      • synthtel2
      • 3 years ago

      My dad has a Skylake / Win7 system built after MS said Skylake wasn’t included in this mess, and the build made perfect sense until today’s announcement.

        • Krogoth
        • 3 years ago

        Why are you using Windows 7 on a Skylake system when the OS will become obsolete well before the hardware? You couldn’t even get first-hand copies of Windows 7 license at the time Skylake was brand new.

          • synthtel2
          • 3 years ago

          Because in 2020, it’s pretty likely Linux will do what he wants, and Win10 would take an entirely unreasonable amount of setup to be acceptable (the problem involves sharing a slow internet connection with gamers). Also, how exactly did he buy a first-hand copy of Win7 just a couple months ago then? πŸ˜‰

            • LauRoman
            • 3 years ago

            Probably had it before that or moved a retail license from one pc to another and activate by phone? I know i was in that situation with XP once.

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            Bought it from Newegg, January 2017 IIRC. It looks like Newegg has since gone out of stock of all but Win7 Pro, but that one is [url=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416804<]still up[/url<].

            • Krogoth
            • 3 years ago

            It is old stock from years ago that some etailers never bother to remove. Microsoft proactively removed Windows 7 from its licensing once Windows 8/8.1 hit the streets. Windows 8/8.1 met the same fate as soon as Windows 10 went live.

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            [quote<]You couldn't even get first-hand copies of Windows 7 license at the time Skylake was brand new.[/quote<] .... is still evidently untrue. If MS had actively tried to get stuff pulled from the shelves, you'd have a point, but they didn't.

            • D@ Br@b($)!
            • 3 years ago

            I’m in the same boat.
            I think about reverting back to W7 and hope Linux will fit my needs in 2020.
            Gives me another reason not to buy any DDR4.

            • dyrdak
            • 3 years ago

            Considering on how little is left of Windows it’s only inertia and laziness that keeps me on Windows. But since we’re forced into the cloud and a browser is all that’s needed I’ll make my move the moment my Windows system is outdated enough to be too insecure to use. Funny I’ve just recently completed Win10 courses and passed the cert – know your enemy I guess (and I’ve seen enough).

        • bhtooefr
        • 3 years ago

        Yeah, they badly worded [url=https://blogs.windows.com/business/2016/08/11/updates-to-silicon-support-policy-for-windows/<]that announcement[/url<], but it was aimed at the enterprise customers who are buying business-class machines from major OEMs, so I can see why.

          • synthtel2
          • 3 years ago

          Badly worded what now?

          [quote<]6th Gen Intel Core devices on Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 will be supported with all applicable security updates until the end of support for Windows 7 and Windows 8.1.[/quote<] More like a bald-faced lie. There aren't any caveats on that page about it being OEM-only or anything like that. They promised support through January 2020, my dad built a system on the basis of that promise, and now they aren't delivering.

            • bhtooefr
            • 3 years ago

            And that release appears to have been aimed at businesses, who are buying prebuilts that are on the support list, basically saying that [i<]those[/i<] devices would continue getting all updates to the end of support, rather than to 2017-07-17. Where they badly worded was not making it clear that it was only for machines on the list, for people that came at the post from outside of that context. That said, because they did screw that up, if the updates do stop being delivered to your dad's Skylake system, there might be cause for a lawsuit (small claims would likely provide the best return) for the damages required to downgrade to an equivalent Haswell system. (A class action, however, may get Microsoft to resume updates to all Skylake systems, if they actually stop.)

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            There are at least four things on that page I would expect to be worded differently if it were just referring to OEMs. It looks more like the writer actively tried to avoid the subject than any result of carelessness, but when writing about that kind of subject matter, avoiding things just isn’t an option.

            “Do you know why I pulled you over?”
            “I don’t, officer.”
            “You were going 80 in a 55.”
            “But I only looked at my speedometer while I was doing 55!”
            “…”

    • LauRoman
    • 3 years ago

    This is gonna bite me in the ass so hard. I have a skylake cpu. And commeth next year i’m gonna have a hard time installing 10 pro. I had 8 (non pro) on it so i went to install 7 pro then upgraded to 10 pro. However on clean reinstall of 10, because of the uefi embedded 8 non pro code it installs 10 non pro. So the easiest way to do a clean install was to install 7 pro and upgraded it in-place to 10 pro. Imaging or creating some backup does not help too much because i dualboot. Probably windows update is involved in upgrading from 7 to 10 and i hope i don’t get screwed when i do a clean install post july 2018, because i don’t think i’ll have a chance to do one before that.

    I probably could do a backup now, do a clean install of 7 pro then 10 pro now, update that and make a backup of that. Then restore my system from now. And use that backup at a later time (hopefully hw didn’t change too much) then update that and make a new backup.

    Or i could just pirate the darn thing and make my life easier since i can’t remove that embedded license.

      • bhtooefr
      • 3 years ago

      If you have an embedded license, that’s implying that it’s an OEM system that may well remain supported.

      Ideally, it’ll detect that you’ve got a digital entitlement for Pro when you activate 10, and upgrade itself automatically.

      If not, there’s three ways I can think of to fix this.

      Microsoft’s solution is to use the Activation Troubleshooter: [url<]https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/20527/windows-10-activation-troubleshooter[/url<] If that doesn't work, after installation, change product key to VK7JG-NPHTM-C97JM-9MPGT-3V66T (the generic Win10 Pro key, which won't activate), reboot, then change it again to your Win7 key. That might work now, it might not. Finally, if that doesn't work (or if you want to avoid all of that), here's one way to go, to force the installer to give you Pro: [url<]http://www.askvg.com/fix-cant-select-windows-10-pro-edition-during-clean-installation/[/url<]

    • sircharles32
    • 3 years ago

    Right or wrong aside, my question is: Can I circumvent this by simply doing manual updates via WSUS Offline, setup on a supported system (ie, Windows 7 on a Phenom II)?

    Does anyone know?

    • maxxcool
    • 3 years ago

    “”those who would prefer Windows 8.1 or didn’t take up the free offer to upgrade to Windows 10 might be left fuming””

    I have in the last week used one of my windows-7 pro keys to install win10 from scratch. How long that loophole will continue is up to speculation so do it if you can..

      • Ninjitsu
      • 3 years ago

      i took the free offer on one machine, i’m still left fuming

    • Convert
    • 3 years ago

    I don’t understand. How are they preventing new systems from getting updates but allowing existing systems for another year-ish?

      • herbcanter
      • 3 years ago

      Because we are talking Microsoft here, this is not a company that actual cares about it’s users .

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      Because they know people will eventually upgrade and they want to get everyone on Windows 10. I’m not familiar with their EULA but I’d hazard a guess that this move takes advantage of a loophole there which allows them to not provide updates.

    • adampk17
    • 3 years ago

    Dick move.

      • lycium
      • 3 years ago

      This, and only this.

    • Mr Bill
    • 3 years ago

    no water in the bucket
    no Ryzen in the water
    the ground is damp
    windows has moved on
    Tux roots in the mud
    growing a new kernel

    • Waco
    • 3 years ago

    This is pure BS. Newer hardware will not break security updates.

    I can totally see not *supporting* newer hardware running the older OS, but intentionally crippling them and leaving them vulnerable is another thing entirely. If they’re already generating the security patches for older hardware, it’s a zero-effort and zero-cost thing for them to continue allowing them on anything running the OS. It absolutely cost them real development time to do this.

    This is a move motivated purely by profit and the knowledge that many users don’t have a choice for an alternative OS.

    Time to look for a way to spoof processor type in Windows I guess…

      • morphine
      • 3 years ago

      I’m not going to pick a side here because I see both for/against. This isn’t a clear-cut situation, IMO.

      I’ll point out, though, that Win7 doesn’t even have native NVMe or USB 3.0 drivers. If I had to guess, it’s not so much of a matter of an existing stable installation ceasing to function, but more about new installs.

      Another point: by signing off on continued support for the OS in the newer hardware, users would implicitly expect it to work for the foreseeable future, and hardware manufacturers might drop the ball there.

        • Kougar
        • 3 years ago

        New installs are unlikely for that very reason, no NVMe, native USB 3, DX12, whatever. That should be disincentive enough to slap Windows 7 on a kaby lake or Ryzen platform when half the platform won’t even have driver support.

        The downside to Microsoft’s choice is that MS will be artificially creating a lot of unsecured, vulnerable systems ripe for botnets. If someone was already willing to forgo hardware support to use Windows 7 on a brand new PC then killing their security updates is unlikely to suddenly force them to update.

          • herbcanter
          • 3 years ago

          Brand new PC’s are still being sold with Win 7 professional . Granted they are Skylake but they are brand new .

            • Kougar
            • 3 years ago

            If someone was buying a brand new PC today, do you think they would actually know anything about this before they bought an OEM system? I would hazard to guess most wouldn’t and would rudely find out after powering it on.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        If you’re running unsupported, that’s one thing.

        Actively being blocked is another. A simple “hey, this hardware is newer than the OS is intended to support. Function not guaranteed” would solve this and not create vulnerable systems.

          • morphine
          • 3 years ago

          That’s correct, but unfortunately, MS has to deal with customers that would be all like “your updates broke my system.” This is a difficult situation because if you’re in MS’ place, you can never [i<]really[/i<] win. Edit: as to [i<]how[/i<] MS approached the situation, I don't quite agree. But that's my two cents anyhow.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            Updates aren’t suddenly going to make *new* CPUs stop working.

            • Pholostan
            • 3 years ago

            They might very well make people think it broke their system though. It already happens a lot, look at all the people proudly declaring that they have disabled updates. Stupid I know, might as well have a “Please p0wn me” sign. Still it is pretty common for people to behave like dumb-asses and Ms and other companies have to deal with the fallout. Sure they could have done this differently, but it isn’t a sure thing it would have been much better.

            And besides, Win7 is EOL. Extended support doesn’t mean much really, read the contract. Ms might decide a security issue isn’t serious enough to warrant a patch at all. It happens all the time.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            And 8.1 is in the same boat…Which is nowhere near end of support.

            • Pholostan
            • 3 years ago

            Yeah, that is the weird thing here. When they initially began selling 8.1 they promised support a lot longer.

            • ludi
            • 3 years ago

            Because corporate IT departments vetoed anything 8.1 and stayed with 7.

            Now that 7 is EOL and all those executive Surface Pros have Win10 which have to be supported regardless, they’re finally making the jump to Win10 across the board. Hence, Microsoft can shoot and bury 8.1 with no real fallout, regardless of what they said they would do.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 3 years ago

        I’m curious how this affects virtualization. If the VM sees the specific architecture and Microsoft says “no updates for you”, then how are we expected to keep a VM with a still-very-common OS config for helping customers on that OS? Guess I’ll have to fire up the Win 7 VM on my Ryzen box and see what happens.

          • Kougar
          • 3 years ago

          Very interesting question…. Let us know if you find out!

          • Redocbew
          • 3 years ago

          Probably depends on the hypervisor. Virtualbox correctly reports my Win7 VM running on an i3 6100, but if I were to use something which had more control over how the CPU is represented to the guest the results would probably be different. When I was running pfSense in a VM using KVM the CPU was reported as “QEMU Virtual CPU”.

          • Shobai
          • 3 years ago

          Initial reports aren’t good: VirtualBox, at least, is passing host CPU details to the VM and updates are being blocked.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            Confirmed with VirtualBox 5.1 on my rig. Sigh.

            Meant to report back sooner; I tested it out yesterday but forgot to come back.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            DAMMIT.

            Now we can’t even keep our VMs in good shape due to this ludicrous policy.

            • Kougar
            • 3 years ago

            That’s not good. I wonder if we will begin seeing VM software hacks or new options from the VM venders offering hardware ID abstraction.

            Thanks for checking this!

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            For the moment, I can copy the VM to my Skylake box and update it that way. I might also be able to do it by changing to switching to a non-native virtualization technique, but I had the copy idea first. Next time I’ll see what else I can do.

            • Kougar
            • 3 years ago

            Neat idea, but having to do that is just gross. Will take awhile to transfer larger VMs and will add a lot of wear to SSDs to copy them back. I’m almost positive now that the VM venders will find ways to work around this, but I’m less sure about Microsoft allowing it.

          • Mr Bill
          • 3 years ago

          Is it necessary to “update” the VM’s for XP and Win7? Can’t the host OS protect the host platform? Wondering because I have a few things (e.g. recording pulse oximiter) with software that only runs in WinXPPro. Currently running the XPPro VM in my Win7 install on my laptop.

            • Redocbew
            • 3 years ago

            As far as I know the hypervisor itself isn’t involved in filtering network traffic, so if the guest is connected to the Internet, then it’s really just another PC on your network.

            • Mr Bill
            • 3 years ago

            Talk about compatability! It even gets owned the same!

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            For what I’m doing, probably not. I can’t speak to others’ use, though.

        • anotherengineer
        • 3 years ago

        Yes, but what about win8.1?

        I put a system together with skylake and win 8.1Pro because they use it for home office things and some of the software programs they had were not working with W10 yet at the time.

        Pretty sad if they are left out in the dark by MS.

          • morphine
          • 3 years ago

          Absolutely no argument there, as I wrote in the article. My personal two cents is that it was ill-advised.

          The “problem” is, there are comparatively so few people using 8.1 that it doesn’t make business sense to bother :/

          • Waco
          • 3 years ago

          8.1 is in the same boat as 7.

      • Mr Bill
      • 3 years ago

      Is it even in the realm of possibility to protect such a system behind a better router/firewall?

        • Ryu Connor
        • 3 years ago

        Layer 3, 4, and 5 protection (standard router/firwall) isn’t really going to be enough. Unless you’re using a layer 3 ACL to effectively disconnect the system in question from the Internet.

        A router/firewall with layer 6 and 7 protection (HIPS, MitM Proxy with IPS, or UTM) would give you some capability to leave an unpatched system on the Internet.

        Of course then you’re completely reliant on either your local protection install (HIPS/AV) and this very nice layer 6/7 firewall to catch all threats.

        There’s obviously no perfect security solutions. Ideally you’re leveraging the tricks above and patching (and more). Defense in depth, good. Single point of failure, bad.

        Compromising your PC is worth money regardless of what kind of info you have on it.

        [url<]https://krebsonsecurity.com/2012/10/the-scrap-value-of-a-hacked-pc-revisited/[/url<]

          • Mr Bill
          • 3 years ago

          Thank You for the answer. πŸ™‚

      • Voldenuit
      • 3 years ago

      In bird culture, this is considered to be a dick move.

        • Redocbew
        • 3 years ago

        So this is, for the birds?

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        “You pass butter.”

        “…oh my God.”

      • Pitabred
      • 3 years ago

      Are you sure? Security updates involve kernel tweaks many times, and if they’ve turned on compiler flags that require the use of new instructions in the various patches, then yeah, it would break backwards compatibility.

        • RAGEPRO
        • 3 years ago

        The Windows 10 kernel doesn’t use SSSE3, SSE4/4.1/4.A, AVX, FMA, or AES-NI. Given that there is modern, current hardware that doesn’t support some of those things I rather doubt they will be breaking backward compatibility by using newer instructions.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        This is forward updates…

      • DancinJack
      • 3 years ago

      wah wah. get over it.

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      You are making mountains out of molehills. The only userbase that is affected by is a tiny minority of people who built Ryzen and Kaby Lake systems and decided for whatever reason to use a Windows 7 license. IMO, you should really be using Windows 10 with a Ryzen built since it is far better at thread scheduling then Windows 7.

      The overwhelming majority of Ryzen and Kaby Lake systems that are out in field already equipped with Windows 10 and users that are building are using either Windows 10 or some other OS.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        So Microsoft wasting resources to block certain hardware configs on a tiny minority of users that *know* they’re running unsupported makes sense to you?

          • Meadows
          • 3 years ago

          To me it does. It makes perfect business sense and, as a result, it’s not a “waste of resources”.

          • Krogoth
          • 3 years ago

          They aren’t wasting resources. They are trying to proactively steer them into upgrading an OS that is almost EOL on a hardware platform that is going persist long before that.

          The real reason behind this move is that Microsoft is proactively forcing companies to use Windows 10 on newer hardware platform and remove the option of “downgrading into 7”. They wanted to avoid a repeat of XP/2003 ecology.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            8.1 support is half a decade out.

            • Krogoth
            • 3 years ago

            Windows 8/8.1 were never adopted in en mass in the SMB/Enterprise world. The few systems that were equipped with it were updated to Windows 10 as soon as the “Free Upgrade” initiative came out.

            Skylake systems from OEMs were equipped with Windows 10 (both were release to public around the same time).

            This “problem” only affects a vanishing small crowd (a few thousand users at most) for whatever reason wanted to use Windows 7, 8/8.1 on their Skylake build and newer.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            Anything to back that up? There were many OEMs selling 7/8.1 Skylake builds…

            Regardless, this move violates their prior promises on support for 7, and wildly violates them for 8.1.

            It’s a bad move, plain and simple.

            • Krogoth
            • 3 years ago

            You must be living under a rock or haven’t check out OEMs in the past few years. Windows 7 was gone from every major OEM as soon as Windows 8.1 went RTM. Microsoft dropped the “7 downgrade” licensing offer and that was well before Skylake was commercially available.

            There was a small window where you could get a Windows 8.1 license when Skylake platform was just hitting the shelves but that closed quickly when Window 10s went RTM. There’s really no reason to downgrade either.

            MS hasn’t violate anything in the EULA either. Windows 7’s mainstream support already expired in 2015. They are just proactively trying to corral F1000 customers over to Windows 10/Sever 2016 ecosystem.

            • smilingcrow
            • 3 years ago

            Dell for example support 8.1 and 10 on my business class Latitude 5175 and 7370 and I intend to stick with 8.1 for the long term.
            Fortunately they are both on Dell’s list of supported systems otherwise my disdain for Microsoft would have hit 11.
            That gives me 6 years to look at other options as MS are pariahs to me now.

            • herbcanter
            • 3 years ago

            The ONLY reason i bought a new computer was because it came with Win 7 pro , i have extensive experience with Win 10 and it is by far the worst OS i have ever used in so many different ways .

            Unless a bare bones version is considered with all the crap gone there is no chance in hell i will ever consider it .

            Most i talk to said they won’t even go near it then , they say the more time you use it the much worse it gets and thats been my experience also.

            Linux is a much much better computing experience.

        • herbcanter
        • 3 years ago

        The overwhelming majority of Ryzen and Kaby Lake systems that are out in field already equipped with Windows 10.

        Thats because they have to use Win 10 , if they weren’t forced to do it there would be a ton of them with Win 7 on them.

      • PixelArmy
      • 3 years ago

      False premise.
      [quote<]If they're already generating the security patches for older hardware, it's a zero-effort and zero-cost thing for them to continue allowing them on anything running the OS.[/quote<] They have to, you know test these things, which does in fact cost money, time, and effort. Multiply by cpu variants. Multiply again by platform chipsets.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        They don’t have to test non supported hardware.

          • PixelArmy
          • 3 years ago

          *facepalm* then it doesn’t even have to install on said hardware…
          Your whole spiel is essentially asking to make it that hardware “supported”, unless you actually think deploying untested security patches is a good idea. No sane company would do this.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            Sigh. You don’t get it.

            Unsupported is 100% different than actively blocked. Further, software security patches are not suddenly going to break based on newer hardware in the vast majority of cases.

            I can’t wait for this to break VMs required for older software…

            • PixelArmy
            • 3 years ago

            No, I get what you are saying. Just let it go and let the user assume all the risk.

            But you don’t seem to understand what you are asking is a non-starter… This isn’t like a video game or something. For this, it’s either 1) test and allow install, or 2) don’t test and don’t install, there is no 3) don’t test and allow install.
            Neither 1 or 2 is a “zero-effort and zero-cost thing”. #2 is simply a better allocation of resources.

            [quote<]Further, software security patches are not suddenly going to break based on newer hardware [b<]in the vast majority of cases[/b<][/quote<] I notice, you didn't say 100% of cases... because you can't... They are guarding against the super-slim chance something doesn't work as expected, that they don't want to dedicate resources to deal with. Now, you're going to say, "they don't have to, it's 'unsupported'", but the fact is, it's still their headache, especially since this stuff is pushed via Windows Update.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            I can’t say 100% because it’s literally impossible to state that with certainty. I’m willing to bet it’s more like 99.9999999999% of cases, since core architectural differences aren’t suddenly going to cause a conflict with a security patch. x86 is x86, and if the instruction set on newer CPUs is a [i<]superset[/i<] of the older CPUs, it's literally not going to break anything. MS blatantly lied about this support for both Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 (see the other thread going on this subject).

            • PixelArmy
            • 3 years ago

            *googles* cpu errata

            • Ninjitsu
            • 3 years ago

            I bet the security patches need TSX

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            It’s the other way around – if TSX could somehow break the patches that work fine without it, this situation would make a bit more sense.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            Solution – don’t enable TSX on operating systems that don’t use it. πŸ˜›

      • Yan
      • 3 years ago

      It would be even better if AMD itself developed a work-around.

      • herbcanter
      • 3 years ago

      Microsoft is an AWFUL company and could care less about it’s customers , they have already completely destroyed their reputation .

      Microsoft has and still is losing customers by the truckloads and very deservingly so , they are completely lost and spiraling out of control .

      It is 100% on them though , their disgraceful actions will never be forgotten and they will continue to pay a big price.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        Unfortunately, I think you’re overestimating how much the general public cares. They’ll continue to buy a new computer every few years when theirs dies. That computer will have the newest version of Windows (no matter how “bad” it is), and life goes on.

        The year of the [non-Microsoft] desktop is further out than any of us care to admit…

          • herbcanter
          • 3 years ago

          I can’t tell you how many people i know who have either no plans on buying a new PC or rushed to buy a Skylake version for the sole reason of it coming with a version of Win 7 installed .

          AMD and Intel made decisions that cost them a TON of money , they listened to MS about refusing to support Win 7 .

          I think Win 10 is so hated that people will continue to choose Android and tablets that do not have Win 10 for their computing needs.

      • Zizy
      • 3 years ago

      Option 1: actively block update. Cost ~ 0$. Internet raging = high. Business raging = low-nonexistent. End of story in a few weeks.
      Asshole model. Works fine because people tend to shut up eventually and this doesn’t piss off anyone that matters.

      Option 2: release untested update. Cost ~ 0$ initially. IF something ends up broken no matter how many caveats about “your own risk”, it can get expensive and will lead to even worse raging.
      This is Linux’s model, except there nobody rages because it is a surprise when something works, not when it doesn’t.

      Option 3: test and release. This costs, and poses potential future problems for MS as W7 is looking to live for too long already.
      Why waste money when nobody that matters wants to run W7 on Kaby Lake / Ryzen? To shut up irrelevant people? LOL.

      Option 4: Screw up just W7 owners, W8.1 is supported. Irrelevant change that bears some of Option3’s extra costs and no benefits. People would still rage.
      Why waste money when almost nobody runs W8.1 and nobody would want it on fresh Kaby Lake / Ryzen system?

      Some other options I missed?
      Nah, they picked the only logical option. Both systems came with explicit caveat that W10 is needed on them, and if someone stubbornly clings to W7 … screw them.

        • Waco
        • 3 years ago

        Option 1 cost real money to implement.
        Option 2 is free and preferred.
        Option 3 costs the same as option 2, honestly. They’re still testing the updates on newer platforms for OEMs anyway.
        Option 4 costs the same as option 1, but still pisses everyone off for lying about support.

        Seriously, there’s no upside in this for MS except forcing people to update at the expense of much more money spent to actively block, screw up VMs, and piss everyone off. There’s literally zero upside to this and there are real costs associated with the blocking (especially now since VMs need to be fixed).

          • Krogoth
          • 3 years ago

          There is a massive upside for Microsoft to do this.

          [b<]They want to avoid a repeat of unusually long lifespan of 2003/XP ecosystem in F1000 companies[/b<] Average joe doesn't care about this since they operate whatever OS is loaded with their OEM systems and if they were to get a new one today. It is going to be equipped with some flavor of Windows 10. The only people who give a flying hoot about this is a tiny but vocal minority. They don't like Windows 10 for whatever reason and want to vainly hang onto a dying platform.

            • Waco
            • 3 years ago

            If that was their intent, they should have ensured they didn’t break VMs.

    • canmanone
    • 3 years ago

    Hello linux how are you. Will be glad to have met you.

      • EndlessWaves
      • 3 years ago

      Yeah, if you want poor support for new hardware then Linux does it bigger and better than windows.

        • synthtel2
        • 3 years ago

        Poor support in one case means wifi and printers are occasionally annoying to get working (and they’re less so every year). In the other, MS is basically saying “that’s a shiny new system you’ve got there. It’d be a shame if something happened to it.”

        It’s apples and oranges, but there’s no doubt in my mind about which one is more onerous.

        • srg86
        • 3 years ago

        Not in my experience, any more.

        • LauRoman
        • 3 years ago

        Don’t know man, i have linux on skylake generation hardware and am currently testing on kaby lake and it works just fine. It actually supports some old addin cards i use ootb and i can ssh as soon as it first boots. It also works with some flashing software i use better than windows x64 (which doesn’t work at all there, but does on x32). I do have some gripes wit it, but i am unsattisfied by no single OS.

          • herbcanter
          • 3 years ago

          I run Linux on Skylake also , no issues whatsoever.

        • Shambles
        • 3 years ago

        That’s the whole point of linux. If you want to run an obsolete kernel from 10 years ago that doesn’t support modern hardware you have that option. Meanwhile the rest of us will happily continue to upgrade and receive great out of the box support for new hardware.

        • herbcanter
        • 3 years ago

        Never had any hardware issues with Linux .

      • dragontamer5788
      • 3 years ago

      You do realize that the version of Ubuntu that was released in 2009 was Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala). That version of Ubuntu was running Kernel version 2.6.31 (there have been TWO MAJOR upgrades of the Kernel since then).

      Linux users update to the newest version of Linux, even though each time you go through a minor Kernel revision… VMware drivers can stop working, your displays often have to be reinstalled and other crap.

      And yeah, the Ubuntu upgrades to Gnome 3 were filled with the wailing and gnashing of teeth too. The only difference is that Microsoft actually supports 8-year-old software for the entire time. The Linux community however actively gets to the newest stuff.

        • synthtel2
        • 3 years ago

        It’s a whole lot easier to take Ubuntu 16.04 and get an experience like 9.10 than it is to get a Win7 experience out of Win10, and that isn’t just a happy accident. I detest Gnome 3 (as I’ve ranted about in the forums a fair bit lately), but it’s still pretty trivial to rip it out and use something decent instead. My concern is more that people will think Linux is garbage because Gnome is the first thing they see.

        IME, an average year’s worth of updates break more things on Windows than Linux these days. I hear most distros don’t handle that as well as mine, though.

          • dragontamer5788
          • 3 years ago

          [quote<]It's a whole lot easier to take Ubuntu 16.04 and get an experience like 9.10 than it is to get a Win7 experience out of Win10,[/quote<] Wut? [url<]http://classicshell.net/[/url<]

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            I suppose experience may have been too narrow a word. I meant more generally what it takes to nullify any objections to the new stuff.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 3 years ago

            A lot of the objections are groupthink and paranoia.

            Disable Cortana and basically the vast majority of telemetry collection straight up disappears. And it isn’t very difficult to hit the disable button on the various issues. Besides, Ubuntu / Firefox automatically pick up your core-dumps in the name of “fixing bugs”… you gotta be sure to disable those “collections” in Linux as well if you’re really worried about privacy or something.

            [url<]https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ErrorTracker[/url<]

            • synthtel2
            • 3 years ago

            The first step of that is disabling Cortana properly, which I’m not aware of a way to reliably do without regedit or a 3rd-party program. Even after that (and setting everything to the lowest level of telemetry it will allow), good luck deciphering everything it tries to do on the network. It also doesn’t like to leave that kind of setting where you put it.

            Ubuntu is the only distro that pulls garbage like that. Canonical gives all of Linux a bad name with it (as you just demonstrated), and it pisses me off. Even so, Ubuntu is miles ahead of Windows, because if you tell Ubuntu to cut it out, it’ll actually do so.

            These may be pointless concerns for you, but for many they are not.

            • herbcanter
            • 3 years ago

            Despite what MS says there is no way you can turn off what Win 10 does and collects , it’s much much much worse than anybody could imagine.

            Wilders Security forums detailed just how bad it is and it’s beyond mind boggling , i mean jaw dropping is what it is , far far worse than anybody realizes .

            There is nobody in their right mind who would ever use it if they knew the truth , MS will NEVER tell the truth because there would be a mass exodus and hysteria.

        • LauRoman
        • 3 years ago

        2005-2010-ish was a weird time. Linux will still never support weird motherboard chipset-bios combos from that era. I knew it worked on some P45 motherboards but not on others. Never worked on 2 of my x38 boards. Those were weird times and weird BIOS implementations. I remember having trouble booting even windows setup from usb on some generations of motherboards (not related to sata or crap like that) while previous generations worked fine.

        Linux does abandon some hadware like 386 ( pretty sure it’s yet to drop 486). I’m pretty sure that’s the only abandoned one since there are separate efforts to support architectures older than that by ELKS.

        LE: Apparently some Sparc versions are no longer supported in any capacity.

        LLE: Looks like there are packages in the main repo that support vms, like open-vm-tools which is updated regularly and often before or immediately after a new os release.

        LLE: Reinstalling the drivers is a non-issue if the gpu is intel or amd using the open drivers. Nvidia is a hit or miss if it was not previously tested.

      • odizzido
      • 3 years ago

      Where is steamOS already? Valve should have enough money to pay an army of programmers to make gaming on linux work decently.

        • LostCat
        • 3 years ago

        Exactly where the rest of linux is, you’d have to pay people to use it.

          • herbcanter
          • 3 years ago

          Not with Linux , with Win 10 i would have to be paid very substantially to use that atrocity day in day out . It completely destroys your computing experience , even the layout is horrific.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 3 years ago

        SteamOS is not a desktop system, it’s DIY console system.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      I wish going Linux was that simple. This is the exact reason Microsoft is able to turn the heat on us.

      • Kretschmer
      • 3 years ago

      There are dozens of you…dozens!

      • herbcanter
      • 3 years ago

      I tried Linux for the first time and LOVE IT , if not Win 7 Linux for sure .

      Win 10 will NEVER be an option. Yes, i used it for many months and like many others say the more you use it the more you end up hating it , it’s awful.

      • BenBasson
      • 3 years ago

      You might not be so glad after a few months. Ubuntu major version upgrades seem to always break something fairly fundamental (like having a wifi icon in the systray) and that’s one of the few distros that isn’t completely bonkers.

        • synthtel2
        • 3 years ago

        LTS and a sane DE (basically anything that isn’t Unity or Gnome) do wonders for that.

    • MrDweezil
    • 3 years ago

    I’m confused. I thought the plan was to block updates for users with CPUs [b<]older[/b<] than than Kaby and Ryzen.

      • Voldenuit
      • 3 years ago

      They want to force holdouts and people with newish systems onto Win10.

      They don’t care about a 10 year old rustbucket at a net cafe in Senegal.

      • MOSFET
      • 3 years ago

      Yep, you block the OLD cpu’s on the NEW os, and you block the NEW cpu’s on the OLD os.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      That would actually benefit Intel and AMD. It used to be that a new Windows OS benefited hardware makers because it encouraged people to upgrade. In this case though, people who don’t want to upgrade to Windows 10 will actually HOLD OFF upgrading. I’m sure Intel and AMD don’t like this one bit but they have to lick the boot.

        • VincentHanna
        • 3 years ago

        I’m sure they don’t care.

        The number of people willing to upgrade JUST the CPU, who actually bother to run a version of windows, but not the latest one, is a really tiny group.

        Security conscious people go with linux.
        Gamers go with 10 because of DX 12.
        Home users tend to run the OS that comes with the PC whatever it is.
        Enthusiasts go with whatever is new and shiny.
        IT pros know how to lock down windows so that it is as good or better than 7. (lets be honest here, its not exactly hard.)

    • PainIs4ThaWeak1
    • 3 years ago

    [Insert United Airlines flavored meme against Microsoft]

    Though seriously, I can’t be the only one that finds this incredibly asinine.

      • VincentHanna
      • 3 years ago

      Microsoft.

      We won’t literally beat you up. So there’s that.

        • Mad_Dane
        • 3 years ago

        Are you sure about that? Sir Nutella looks like an evil grinch!

        • travbrad
        • 3 years ago

        They also got rid of that guy who throws chairs.

          • Redocbew
          • 3 years ago

          WHO SAID SIT DOWN!?!?!!?

      • VincentHanna
      • 3 years ago

      Microsoft. Go ahead, pantyhoes are fine. No, really. Preferable even. If you had seen some of the… … … {computer shudders}… … … What I wouldn’t give for him to wear… … … I want… …

      Shutting down sequence from 2001 a space oddessy. Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer due…

    • dpaus
    • 3 years ago
      • chuckula
      • 3 years ago

      My thoughts exactly!

      • MustangSally
      • 3 years ago

      Presumably what you got back when you clicked on ‘Update’??

      • GeneS
      • 3 years ago

      It’s his best comment ever,
      An eloquent sensation;
      a detailed description,
      of a null destination.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 3 years ago

    [quote<] All operating systems have to drop support for older hardware sometime, and Microsoft's actions are far from unexpected.[/quote<] That's kind of not at all what this is, wouldn't you say? Although I suppose the reverse might be true as well.

      • chuckula
      • 3 years ago

      It’s more like: All old operating systems have to stop receiving updates sometime.

        • Kougar
        • 3 years ago

        There’s a difference between not supporting the hardware, and outright disabling all updates including unrelated security fixes when newer hardware is detected. MS could’ve just ignored newer hardware to run “as is” and still posted security updates.

          • EndlessWaves
          • 3 years ago

          Are you sure it’s all updates? The wording in the error message only mentions important security updates.

            • Kougar
            • 3 years ago

            It makes even LESS sense blocking low-risk and moderate risk security updates and permitting critical hotfixes. That will just encourage the users Microsoft is targeting to stay on their OS’s or feel it is reasonably secure when it has many unpatched known vulnerabilities. It would self-defeat the goal Microsoft is trying to make with this decision.

            There is really no defense of Microsoft’s decision. Running unsupported is one thing, but artificially blocking security updates that are being rolled out to other users of the same OS just because of the hardware age is something else entirely.

            • Krogoth
            • 3 years ago

            This is a non-issue for the vast majority of the Windows 7 users. This only affects current hardware platforms but they are being loaded with Windows 10 if you got via OEM channels.

            Microsoft is avoiding a repeat unusually long lifespan of XP/2003 ecology.

            • Kougar
            • 3 years ago

            If MS wanted to avoid supporting old OS’s it should have adjusted its lifespan/support timings accordingly.

            This method doesn’t reduce lifespan on the OS, it only reduces the number of people it “supports”. MS is still making the security patches anyway, just giving them to some of its userbase instead of all of it.

        • MileageMayVary
        • 3 years ago

        I kinda get it for Win7 and even 8 but not 8.1, its still too recent.

        • santista
        • 3 years ago

        Nah. It’s more like: Microsoft wants more people to be on Windows 10 since it has built-in spyware, and the more data they collect, the more they profit.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 3 years ago

      I was about to say the same thing.

      It seems like literally the opposite situation. I was waiting for follow up of, “While that is reasonable, Kaby Lake and Ryzen find themselves on the opposite situation,” but it never really came.

      Very peculiar.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 3 years ago

        Folks go to sleep at the wheel all the time. I’m guessing Wayne was just sleepy.

    • DancinJack
    • 3 years ago

    Good. Glad they’re spending resources where it counts.

    I know some people here will be upset, but that’s just too bad. W10 is better than its predecessors in nearly every way. Whine all you want about stuff, as it makes no difference to me, but it’s time to upgrade.

      • FranzVonPapen
      • 3 years ago

      Please tell me you were paid to make that statement, and it does not actually reflect your internal thought processes.

      Please.

      • LoneWolf15
      • 3 years ago

      If a system came with an OS, that OS should be supported on it til EOL. Period.

      You forget the enterprise environment, that can’t just switch things willy-nilly, sometimes due to specific line-of-business applications. You may not also realize, but as someone who manages near a thousand workstations for different clients (including patching) Microsoft has had a lovely reputation for breaking multiple things with each new round of patches for about 12-16 months now –and in Windows 10, you can’t easily refuse patches. I’d be totally fine with them shoving patches down my throat if they hadn’t fired most of their QA staff to save a buck on the quarterly balance sheets, but that’s what happened. And at least with Windows 7/8 I can easily block a patch that turns out to be problematic, or roll it back.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This