there will be no Windows 7 ZEN drivers - AMD confirmed it

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

A never os will be more secure. Also you have lots more things like secure boot, secure parts of the kernel, more auth methodes.

 

http://www.zdnet.com/article/will-windows-10s-coming-security-features-win-over-windows-7-users/

That sounds like baseless assertions. So far I have never heard any details as to why it is "more secure" and meanwhile, the vulnerabilities on Windows 10 notorious fucking lack of testing or opting out of updates makes it less secure.

[Doobeedoo]

Wouldn't make sense to build a system with yet to be released new hardware with almost decade old OS which mainstream support ended 2y ago and W10 is now like 2y old and very polished etc.

Also, Zen is completely new something with mind for new OS aka W10 so it's something that Windows didn't saw before. 
Makes no sense dragging certain software, like APIs for example.

[Belgarathian]

So basically it has been validated with W7, but isn't officially supported. So it'll work, but if it doesn't you're up shit creek without a paddle. 

 

Other than W7 having a major share of the OS market, nothing wrong with not supporting an OS 3 generations old and is on life-support from the developer. 

[samcool55]

I'll repeat myself here but whatever

To keep it short, they should support W7 because a lot of companies still use W7 everywhere and not many of them are exactly happy to switch to W10 because from a business POV W10 is complete crap because the benefits they get are almost 0 and it costs them a LOT more money and time than W7.

Most W7 machines today can be found in the business world.

Why you might ask? Well first of all current/older machines run W7, most IT infrastuctures are designed with W7 in mind so adding new systems that run W7 is very easy for them.

W7 is also enough for what they do with it, it gets updates, support like you would expect and every modern program works on it.

 

But then there's the big elephant in the room, the way W10 updates. In short, it's a massive pain in the *** and a nightmare to maintain.

It's much more difficult to properly control updates to the clients, they just happen if you like it or not which can be VERY annoying if an update breaks compatibility with a program. But that's not the biggest problem with it.

 

By now we all know MS likes to release new builds, problem with that is that with every new build the foundation of W10 changes a bit, kernel get slightly tweaked, GPO stuff changes and a lot of other things. Which means with every new build EVERYTHING needs to be checked for possible leaks, faults or issues. And with the rate new builds are pushed out this is 1-2 times a year, which is awful because checking everything can take months.

 

Now let's compare that to W7 shall we. W7 has 2 builds, 7600 and 7601 and because there are no new builds planned and 7601 is already a few years old, there's no need to check everything every few months like you have to do with W10. The config that they have now is very likely the one they will use when they phase their stuff out which is impossible with W10. So that brings maintenance costs down A LOT. Time = money and companies want to spent as little money as possible. 

 

So there you have it, maybe we shouldn't use it but companies do because it's a lot cheaper and much more reliable for them. 

[dalekphalm]

27 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

-snip-

Just so you know, the Windows 10 mandatory updates thing is basically a non-issue with most Businesses, as if they've designed their network properly, they're running a WSUS server anyway, and thus have 100% control over how the updates work and when they are applied.

 

Furthermore, businesses who aren't working on a Windows 10 upgrade path are gonna be in big shit in 3 years, since once Extended Support is gone, they'll be left with machines that will become extremely vulnerable, very quickly.

 

We've already made the switch to Windows 10. It was a bitch, but it wasn't that difficult. We also are medium sized, and only run ~150 computers. So obviously it's different if we had 10,000 computers to deal with. Most of the Windows 10 issues have been worked out here, and the biggest problem was crappy in-place upgrades. All the new computers that shipped w/ Windows 10 pre-installed are working great. And the ones that had in-place upgrade problems, we performed a clean install as-needed.

[AresKrieger]

7 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Just so you know, the Windows 10 mandatory updates thing is basically a non-issue with most Businesses, as if they've designed their network properly, they're running a WSUS server anyway, and thus have 100% control over how the updates work and when they are applied.

The main issue for businesses is more along the lines of legacy software support as MS's compatibility modes often don't help, also small businesses often don't have a WSUS server (or any server for that matter) so that only applies to larger businesses.

[samcool55]

12 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Just so you know, the Windows 10 mandatory updates thing is basically a non-issue with most Businesses, as if they've designed their network properly, they're running a WSUS server anyway, and thus have 100% control over how the updates work and when they are applied.

 

Furthermore, businesses who aren't working on a Windows 10 upgrade path are gonna be in big shit in 3 years, since once Extended Support is gone, they'll be left with machines that will become extremely vulnerable, very quickly.

 

We've already made the switch to Windows 10. It was a bitch, but it wasn't that difficult. We also are medium sized, and only run ~150 computers. So obviously it's different if we had 10,000 computers to deal with. Most of the Windows 10 issues have been worked out here, and the biggest problem was crappy in-place upgrades. All the new computers that shipped w/ Windows 10 pre-installed are working great. And the ones that had in-place upgrade problems, we performed a clean install as-needed.

Well you are one of the lucky few in that case.

And i guess it's safe to say that most companies don't care atm about a w10 upgrade path because it costs time, money and the current system is good enough. Most will probably be indeed in big shit in 3 years time. It will very likely be XP all over again.

 

And WSUS does indeed help with updates, but the biggest issue is the fact that there are new builds very frequently. How do they handle that where you work? Uninstalling an update is easy, rolling back a build seems like a much more difficult task...

 

Also i'm not saying going to W10 is impossible, initial setup is probably as difficult or easier as an infrastucture for W7, but it just looks like a much more difficult and time consuming task to maintain properly because there are big changes very frequently, especially compared to W7.

[bimmerman]

Damn. Was seriously considering retiring the i7-950 in favor of a Ryzen chip this year due to Win7 support.

 

Oh well, more money for tires and racing, the old i7's still going strong.

 

All the computers at my company are Win7, including the new computers we buy. Win10's cloud nonsense is a massive dealbreaker for client confidentiality.

[dalekphalm]

17 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

The main issue for businesses is more along the lines of legacy software support as MS's compatibility modes often don't help, also small businesses often don't have a WSUS server (or any server for that matter) so that only applies to larger businesses.

Correct - legacy software is the biggest problem. But that was a problem with Windows XP (Some businesses still have dedicated XP machines) too. This is a problem that will always be around, because businesses don't place enough value on IT or on a good upgrade strategy. They basically say "I'll deal with it when I have to", and then "When I have to" is now, they bitch about how much money they have to spend.

 

It's an industry wide problem.

3 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Well you are one of the lucky few in that case.

And i guess it's safe to say that most companies don't care atm about a w10 upgrade path because it costs time, money and the current system is good enough. Most will probably be indeed in big shit in 3 years time. It will very likely be XP all over again.

 

And WSUS does indeed help with updates, but the biggest issue is the fact that there are new builds very frequently. How do they handle that where you work? Uninstalling an update is easy, rolling back a build seems like a much more difficult task...

 

Also i'm not saying going to W10 is impossible, initial setup is probably as difficult or easier as an infrastucture for W7, but it just looks like a much more difficult and time consuming task to maintain properly because there are big changes very frequently, especially compared to W7.

WSUS controls how frequently you perform updates or roll out new builds. If you don't want every new build? Skip a few. You don't need to install every update as they arrive. You manage the WSUS Server, and thus, decide how fast or slow you handle updates.

 

What you're saying is all true. But it's a systematic problem with the entire business sector.

 

When Windows 7 ends extended support, its' gonna be a goddamn disaster - again. I feel like businesses didn't learn a damn thing from XP.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

19 hours ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

you could just install something like linux or esxi and run windows 7 in a vm and pass it though a gpu. Why do you want windows 7 anyways, its 9 years old and missing lots of features and much less secure.

Because of missing features, mostly because of missing features. (Also, having a PC is older than any Windows version. So? I never understood how a given number of years is supposed to be an argument for anything).

(Btw: would you have support in the VM for things that are not supported in Win 7 anyway?)

19 hours ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

then use something like freeBSD, OSX, openBSD, Linux, and others. Why do you need windows, if you want to be private, don't use windows at all.

Which won't make the driver side any easier than Windows 7. Why use Windows? Maybe because you want to run software that runs only/better in Windows. Or because of our ability to destroy it at will  Why do you want to use anything, anyways? Some may prefer Debian Linux. Some may like MacOS. Others may want to run Minecraft in whichever OS is able to. Some prefer their computers to be on Win 7. It isn't hard to understand.

16 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Windows 7 is dead. Get over yourself use Windows 10 or go to Linux.

No?

 

I can't understand why so many people have problems with free choice. You can use any spreadsheet you choose, for a variety of reasons. You can buy any hardware you may like. You may prefer the performance-price of a used Ivy Bridge today vs. a brand new Kaby Lake. You may like Office 2003 better than 2016. You may play Half Life 2 instead of Battlefield whatever. And in every case, the rest of the world remains free to do differently. Hence, all this obsession to tell people which OS to run is incomprehensible. Sure, manufacturers are free to make or not make drivers for whatever they want. That doesn't mean that some users can't be unhappy about their decisions. We are not talking about storming AMD offices Charlie Hebdo style because of missing drivers. We just express disappointment about the debunked rumor, that's all.

 

Also, if there was a good substitute to Windows 7 out there, this wouldn't be an issue. As it turns out, neither Windows 10 nor any Linux distro is just "Windows 7, but better".

14 hours ago, Raggou said:

But what will you do when Windows 7 dies? 

Who knows. It will depend on what options we have then. Just like Windows XP users could (can, since there are still at least as many XP as Win 8 users) can migrate to many more options now compared to the day Windows Bosta Vista was released.

 

9 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Really, the whole "outdated" argument is not a sound reason to cut support for Win 7 on Ryzen and Kaby.

It even requires a very specific definition of "outdated", because currently Windows 7 has more or less as many users as ll other OSs combined, making it pretty "current" from a hardware manufacturer / software developer point of view.

 

Imagine Coca-Cola releasing a new version, arguing it's just "better" and even "healthier". Imagine 10-20% of consumers switch, the rest keep buying classic. Then you go to a restaurant or supermarket and they tell you to  buy new coke, why would you want the outdated, 130-year old beverage 

 

Microsoft can release as many OSs as they want, it is fine. Whether they are widely adopted, partially adopted, or just DOA is an outcome to be determined by people's choices. It happened to Me, it happened to 8, it happened to OS/2, and it can happen to any OS that for whatever constellation of reasons doesn't square well with people's needs/tastes. Just like Linux (an often proposed alternative "if you don't like win 10") never took off with the masses (for instance, 2020 may come and we'll probably still be able to run more games in Win 7 than Linux).

For all their crimes, I'm still somewhat happy companies have a marketing department: at least someone remember they're selling a product/ providing a service to a costumer. I wouldn't like to witness what all the tech Stalins would do if left on their own  

[DrMikeNZ]

49 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Imagine Coca-Cola releasing a new version, arguing it's just "better" and even "healthier". Imagine 10-20% of consumers switch, the rest keep buying classic. Then you go to a restaurant or supermarket and they tell you to  buy new coke, why would you want the outdated, 130-year old beverage

No need to imagine, they did. Microsoft didn't learn from Coca-cola's experience though, people preferred Windows 7 despite its bitter taste, and Coca-cola would have given it back to us if they were in charge.

[NTDaws]

There is no point in making drivers for Windows 7, there is only three more years of support anyways. Eh never mind that's a lot, WTF AMD.

[Eaglerino]

5 hours ago, DrMikeNZ said:

No need to imagine, they did. Microsoft didn't learn from Coca-cola's experience though, people preferred Windows 7 despite its bitter taste, and Coca-cola would have given it back to us if they were in charge.

I don't get it, when Windows 7 came out people were saying these same things about Windows XP. I knew people that downgraded from 7 to XP because they didn't want to change. This just seems like the same deal, Windows 10 is fine and I still can barely tell the day-to-day use difference from Windows Vista, 7, 8, and 10. I remember liking Vista when it came out because the search function actually freaking worked

[DrMikeNZ]

19 minutes ago, Eaglerino said:

I don't get it, when Windows 7 came out people were saying these same things about Windows XP. I knew people that downgraded from 7 to XP because they didn't want to change. This just seems like the same deal, Windows 10 is fine and I still can barely tell the day-to-day use difference from Windows Vista, 7, 8, and 10. I remember liking Vista when it came out because the search function actually freaking worked

Most people really don't like change. Especially when they don't feel like they have control around the change.

[Space Reptile]

On 9.2.2017 at 6:58 AM, zMeul said:

you should not believe rumors and only what comes from the mouths of the actual people involved, in this case AMD

but an official spokesperson of amd said they would support it during a meeting , GODDAMN IT AMD 

[Dabombinable]

I can install DOS and Windows ME on my 4790K....so how is this exactly a thing?

[Dabombinable]

18 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Citation fucking needed.

I really need to dig up the article+table, where Windows 10 and 8.1 are shown to get rekt by Windows 7 in regards to security (and Windows 7 gets rekt even harder by Vista in that regard as well-MS really didn't want to have their Windows XP successor to be as riddled with holes).

[Misanthrope]

Ok so there will be no more confirmations until launch and this statement is confirmed by AMD*

 

Spoiler

*By that I mean I just made it up and someone will use this post as a source.

 

[Dabombinable]

@Misanthrope @Electronics Wizardy

There you go. Last year's statistics:
https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php?year=2016

 

Edit: Look at the "by vendor list" at the bottom-MS is right behind Adobe.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

@Misanthrope @Electronics Wizardy

There you go. Last year's statistics:
https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php?year=2016

*Bookmarks*

 

Thanks!

[leadeater]

53 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

@Misanthrope @Electronics Wizardy

There you go. Last year's statistics:
https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php?year=2016

 

Edit: Look at the "by vendor list" at the bottom-MS is right behind Adobe.

Edge has more than Windows 7, RIP lol.

[zMeul]

1 hour ago, Space Reptile said:

but an official spokesperson of amd said they would support it during a meeting , GODDAMN IT AMD 

I seriously doubt AMD said that since CB.de doesn't include an actual quote

it's most likely AMD said they validated W7, not that they will fully support it

[Space Reptile]

2 minutes ago, zMeul said:

I seriously doubt AMD said that since CB.de doesn't include an actual quote

it's most likely AMD said they validated W7, not that they will fully support it

well they mentioned drivers , damn , would have been such a nice selling point ,

i mean its validated on 7 so it will run non the less (its x86 so it will run on win 2000 aswell) 

 

but DAMN , why you do this AMD , why you do 

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, Space Reptile said:

well they mentioned drivers , damn , would have been such a nice selling point ,

i mean its validated on 7 so it will run non the less (its x86 so it will run on win 2000 aswell) 

 

but DAMN , why you do this AMD , why you do 

depends who from AMD open their mouths

most people in PR are full of shit, especially AMD's 

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

@Misanthrope @Electronics Wizardy

There you go. Last year's statistics:
https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php?year=2016

 

Edit: Look at the "by vendor list" at the bottom-MS is right behind Adobe.

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

*Bookmarks*

 

Thanks!

Please bear in mind that:

1) Those are publicly known vulnerabilities. So Windows 7 could be full of holes that are being exploited all the time, but because they aren't publicly known they aren't counted. Likewise, something like Linux which is very open with development has its vulnerabilities pretty much always publicly known.

 

2) That list does not take into account how serious vulnerabilities are. Something that just makes something freeze for a while counts as 1. Something which completely takes over your computer also counts as 1.

 

3) That list does not take into consideration how many were fixed, or how quickly.