Uplay PC Client support ending soon for Windows XP

[Jovidah]

9 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

I'm just gonna leave this here......

 

In fact... Google Chrome doesn't even support Vista anymore already and will refuse to update. Same with nVidia geforce experience.

At first I wanted to be pissed, until I checked the Steam hardware survey; really just half a percent of users is still using Vista.

There's still a boatload of Windows 7 users around though. Not surprising given the longevity all the Intel platforms that were bought at the time. There really wasn't much of a hardware reason to move on unless things started dying (my main reason).

[Jovidah]

Interestingly enough some of the users still using Vista, or even XP mostly are the ones that raise most eyebrows for doing it. Government organizations (whether local or national) and even some militaries. They usually have special contracts for continued support though. 

Heck even my university only ditched Windows XP after official support ended.

[AlTech]

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

OK, so you really couldn't find a legitimate positive about the point that UWP games expire, while games bought from other platforms don't.

 

Games don't have lifecycles, developer-support of a game lasts for a limited duration. And games lose compatibility, over time. All of them. What keeps them running are community solutions.

Whether you are aware of them or not, games have product lifecycles. The lifecycle for a game begins when start working on the game and ends when the game is no longer supported or maintained.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

After the period of developer updates is passed, it's up to the community to creates patches, fixes, and share to work-arounds. Gaming communities do this, and it's the basis for almost all the old games sold on Steam, GoG, Uplay, Origin, and elsewhere. Even major games like Morrowind, Fallout 3, depend on community fixes. Games like those would not be playable today, if they released in a system like UWP.

Well that's a shame. I guess those games weren't well built.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

And even if games release for other platforms than UWP, meaning that fixes appear for them to keep them going after the UWP version has ceased working, anyone who bought the game on Windows Store will not be able to make use of any fixes that make the game they own work, because their UWP version of the game can't be modified to work with the fixes.

If the developer does not update their UWP version but they update the Steam version, that makes them a bad developer/publisher.

 

And thus you should not buy their game.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Also, I think it's clear that the UWP platform has less to do with being a DRM measure than it has to do with pushing people to Windows 10 and directing people to the Windows Store, and creating the forced-obsolescence of software, so that people have to buy newer software. It's there to work against the consumer and their interests, not for them.

It is about DRM and security. It's only on UWP because the APIs for it are not on earlier version of Windows.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

You're calling all publishers and developers bad with that statement,

 

No. I never said that.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

because the same reality of newer software and hardware creating compatibility issues with older games applies to all games ever made. Find me one vintage full-DOS game that I can launch in Windows 10 by running its original exe without modifications or additions to the installation or launch options.

Why are you playing a DOS game in 2016? It's like your so desperate to be on this Windows 10 hatred crusade that you need to come up with excuses to justify your opinion.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

BTW, Microsoft seems to put an emphasis on its older software becoming outdated, for the sake of telling people to buy / use their latest software, and you keep claiming that anything less than Windows 10 is expired goods.

 

Again. I never said that. Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 are still somewhat supported and can be used. Windows 10 is the more supported.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Therefore, by your own defence of UWP, that it exposes bad publishers who don't make their software last for eternity, Microsoft is a bad publisher, and you're a defender of bad publisher practices. On this point, we agree.

How are they a bad publisher? Windows Vista and 7 are outdated and legacy products. Windows 8 and 8.1 are also outdated.

 

I do not agree. Bad publisher practice is to make a UWP game and not update it if the non UWP version gets updated.

[AlTech]

 

28 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

Doesn't mean that Windows 7 isn't a better OS and what the majority of gamers use.

It may be what the majority of gamers use but that isn't necessarily a good thing.

 

Windows 7 was once a good OS. It was succeeded by Windows 8 which was then succeeded by Windows 8.1 and then Windows 10.

 

Spreading out software support resources is always a bad idea. Microsoft have been too nice with their current support. Windows Vista and 7 support should have already ended IMO.

 

[AlTech]

30 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

In fact... Google Chrome doesn't even support Vista anymore already and will refuse to update. Same with nVidia geforce experience.

At first I wanted to be pissed, until I checked the Steam hardware survey; really just half a percent of users is still using Vista.

There's still a boatload of Windows 7 users around though. Not surprising given the longevity all the Intel platforms that were bought at the time. There really wasn't much of a hardware reason to move on unless things started dying (my main reason).

Vista is well past it's shelf life. Anybody using Windows Vista or 7 is asking for trouble.

[Jovidah]

Actually 7 is still supported, used by large amounts of people and IMO shouldn't be a problem. I suppose MS is looking to move people over to 10 to prevent another XP-repeat where an OS simply won't die; a third of the users are still on Windows 7.

 

But Vista and XP...yeah... you honestly can't really give any shit for no longer supporting ancient stuff that really hardly anyone is using anymore. Surprisingly XP has a far larger user base (according to the steam survey) than Vista; (1,5% vs 0,25%). But you can't expect a company to keep supporting a 10 year old OS that even MS doesn't even support anymore. It just makes no sense to invest any resources there.

[Dabombinable]

17 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

 

It may be what the majority of gamers use but that isn't necessarily a good thing.

 

Windows 7 was once a good OS. It was succeeded by Windows 8 which was then succeeded by Windows 8.1 and then Windows 10.

 

Spreading out software support resources is always a bad idea. Microsoft have been too nice with their current support. Windows Vista and 7 support should have already ended IMO.

 

Your forgetting to add "" around succeeded. Because to this day, Windows 10 sucks outside of touchscreen laptops (and Windows as a whole seems to handle APU poorly), which the majority of PC users don'y have.

[AlTech]

13 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

Actually 7 is still supported, used by large amounts of people and IMO shouldn't be a problem. I suppose MS is looking to move people over to 10 to prevent another XP-repeat where an OS simply won't die; a third of the users are still on Windows 7.

Windows 7 is no longer being sold and OEMs can not put Windows 7 on any device.........

 

How do you call that supported?

13 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

But Vista and XP...yeah... you honestly can't really give any shit for no longer supporting ancient stuff that really hardly anyone is using anymore. Surprisingly XP has a far larger user base (according to the steam survey) than Vista; (1,5% vs 0,25%). But you can't expect a company to keep supporting a 10 year old OS that even MS doesn't even support anymore. It just makes no sense to invest any resources there.

And yet it seems like you want Windows 7 (an OS which is 3 years older than XP) to be supported for quite a while..

[Jovidah]

Windows 7 is no longer being sold and OEMs can not put Windows 7 on any device.........

 

How do you call that supported?

But at least Microsoft is still tossing out the necessary security updates and such. It's also a rather weird argument; the minute I stop selling it I can stop supporting it? That'd suck for the last few people to buy it... 3 days before support ends.

 

And yet it seems like you want Windows 7 (an OS which is 3 years older than XP) to be supported for quite a while..

Err...what? Windows 7 is about 8 years younger. And the issue here is that there are still large groups of people that are still using it on the computers it came with. Those computers are still working just fine for those people. As I said, 33% of Steam users are still on Windows 7.

 

Now honestly I don't know why people aren't upgrading. I admit it was rather generous of MS to offer the free upgrade. I have nothing against Windows 10. Windows 8 certainly was the biggest pile of dogcrap since Windows ME but, privacy concerns aside I think the general user experience isn't any worse than Windows 7. But you can't just pull the plug on a platform a third of the users are still using. Especially when all their hardware is still good and for a lot of them it simply came with the computer they're using.

[AlTech]

2 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

 

 

But at least Microsoft is still tossing out the necessary security updates and such. It's also a rather weird argument; the minute I stop selling it I can stop supporting it? That'd suck for the last few people to buy it... 3 days before support ends.

 

 

 

Err...what? Windows 7 is about 8 years younger. And the issue here is that there are still large groups of people that are still using it on the computers it came with. Those computers are still working just fine for those people. As I said, 33% of Steam users are still on Windows 7.

*Brain fart*  I meant to have the comparison to Vista not XP. And it is 3 years Younger (I'm tired) than Vista.

 

And? Just because my grandma has a Diesel VW cheating emissions car (See VW Cheating US emissions tests) doesn't mean it's ideal or a good to use.....

 

2 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

Now honestly I don't know why people aren't upgrading. I admit it was rather generous of MS to offer the free upgrade. I have nothing against Windows 10.

They claim that the Telemetry is uncalled for (it has been a godsend to developers!), they claim that Windows 10 is unstable (every OS has it's quirks and kinks in the chain, they just get fixed over time) and they claim that Windows 7 is so magnificent that there should be nothing wrong with using it well pas it's shelf life.

2 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

Windows 8 certainly was the biggest pile of dogcrap since Windows ME but, privacy concerns aside I think the general user experience isn't any worse than Windows 7. But you can't just pull the plug on a platform a third of the users are still using. Especially when all their hardware is still good and for a lot of them it simply came with the computer they're using.

Just because a manufacturer pulls the plug doesn't mean it won't be used anymore.

 

In Paris Charles de gaules airport, they use Windows 3.01 .......... Numerous ATMs run Windows XP.....

[Jovidah]

Well 7 is still younger than Vista. I know it's 'just 3 years' but remember that since Windows 7, hardware improvements on the CPU side have been zilch. 

Another reason a lot of people have bought Windows 7 fairly late, is that Windows 8 sucked so much that people preferred to just put an older OS on new-bought systems. So a lot of these systems probably aren't that old. I can imagine that it left a lot of people with-upgrade anxiety.

And again; a lot of the systems that have Windows 7 were simply bought with it. I can understand if (especially less tech-savy users) aren't exactly looking forward to just upgrading their OS, even when it's free. It's always a hassle, and god knows what MS has in store for you with the new version (again...W8-induced anxiety).

 

Also, it is ridiculous to expect force people to upgrade when the hardware is still working just fine. Remember, plenty of these Windows 7 users have older hardware that still does everything they want it to, but for which the manufacturer never decided to roll out Windows 10 support. Take my age old X58 platform here; ASUS simply won't support it. Now in my case I had to go for new hardware anyway because it was falling apart, having stability issues etc, but if it hadn't this old i7 would still be faster than a large part of the CPUs being sold right now. 

 

Now there's a lot of chicken-egg going on here but in all fairness I think MS did to some extend bring this upon themselves. If Windows 8 hadn't sucked so much it's unlikely this would ever have been such a big deal. It also ties in with the lack of development on the CPU side...which sucks for MS but IMO they can't just dump upon the users. Again; I know this is a problem for the industry in general, as people simply aren't upgrading, but in all fairness the industry (looking at Intel here) isn't giving them any reason to. 

[AlTech]

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Well 7 is still younger than Vista. I know it's 'just 3 years' but remember that since Windows 7, hardware improvements on the CPU side have been zilch. 

Your point being?

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Another reason a lot of people have bought Windows 7 fairly late, is that Windows 8 sucked so much that people preferred to just put an older OS on new-bought systems. So a lot of these systems probably aren't that old. I can imagine that it left a lot of people with-upgrade anxiety.

Well don't buy outdated software is the lesson that needs to be learnt.

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

And again; a lot of the systems that have Windows 7 were simply bought with it.

That's funny since consumers haven't physically been able to buy Windows 7 for over a year. OEMs on the other hand can still buy it but

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

it I can understand if (especially less tech-savy users) aren't exactly looking forward to just upgrading their OS, even when it's free. It's always a hassle, and god knows what MS has in store for you with the new version (again...W8-induced anxiety).

Well Microsoft needs to make GWX 2.0 to make everybody who uses Windows Vista and 7 pestered until they upgrade to Windows 10.

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Also, it is ridiculous to expect force people to upgrade when the hardware is still working just fine.

Hardware working fine has little to no correlation with software. So please, stop associating hardware with software. You're running Windows not Mac.

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Remember, plenty of these Windows 7 users have older hardware that still does everything they want it to, but for which the manufacturer never decided to roll out Windows 10 support.

Windows 10 will work fine on older systems. Windows 10 updates are distributed by Microsoft and not OEMs. So there should be no issue here.

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Take my age old X58 platform here; ASUS simply won't support it. Now in my case I had to go for new hardware anyway because it was falling apart, having stability issues etc, but if it hadn't this old i7 would still be faster than a large part of the CPUs being sold right now. 

Oh.... so you're drivers aren't being made for Windows 10? Well in that case it's because you need to stop causing PC component sales to decline and participate in helping it survive.

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Now there's a lot of chicken-egg going on here but in all fairness I think MS did to some extend bring this upon themselves. If Windows 8 hadn't sucked so much it's unlikely this would ever have been such a big deal.

Why do you think Windows 10 has perpetual updates? So that everybody is on the same version of Windows and they can easily push out updates without worrying about whether or not people will be bothered to update.

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

It also ties in with the lack of development on the CPU side...which sucks for MS but IMO they can't just dump upon the users. Again; I know this is a problem for the industry in general, as people simply aren't upgrading, but in all fairness the industry (looking at Intel here) isn't giving them any reason to. 

Upgrading a PC has no correlation to upgrading Windows.

[Jovidah]

I was about to give a response on the details. But then I realized you are proliferating exactly the "update your PC because, hey you should buy new stuff every 3 years because we tell you too even when it works fine" kind of attitude which caused everyone to think Microsoft (and some of the manufacturers) are asshole companies. You seem to have it in your mind that a computer should only last 2 years... 3 years at most.

This is the same kind of bullshit attitude that now has phone manufacturers soldering batteries to the phones instead of allowing you to replace them, just to shorten the life expectancy.

 

Not everyone has the money to update every 3 or even every 5 years. Nor do they really have any reason to. Maybe your arguments make sense for some of the enthusiasts, but for a lot of the normal users they don't. The fact that hardware has largely been stagnant means that people would rather spend the money on things like...well.. health insurance, their children's education, a broken down car or anything but upgrading a computer that still works just great and still does everything they need it to.

For a lot of people, hardware and software are connected. If you don't understand that as a company that's your fault, not the customer's. Not everyone is rich, nor is everyone an expert user.

 

You're expecting everyone to buy a new car every 5 years just because it has 1% more efficient, comes with a new glovebox and has spinning rims. That's just a stupid and outdated business model. Improve the product by 30% and then we'll talk. You don't see nVidia having any trouble pushing their new graphic cards do you?

 

And the reason Microsoft is being held to a higher standard here is because they're having a big fat monopoly on the consumer OS side. While I'm not necessarily against that (it offers a lot of advantages), with great monopoly comes great responsibility. They created that situation and benefited from years. They can't just walk away from the disadvantages it brings.

 

Honestly, if this is how you're trying to represent Microsoft you're only proving the case of all the haters. Remember, all those 'stupid idiots who want to use Windows 7' are your customers. They're always right, even when they're not.

[Delicieuxz]

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Windows 7 is no longer being sold and OEMs can not put Windows 7 on any device.........

 

How do you call that supported

Sales are sales, and support is support. They're as different as buying a car from a dealership is from having maintenance work done on it 15 years after it ceased to be sold by the manufacturer. I don't know why you'd conflate the two, other than to deliberately mislead readers. At any rate, any insistence from you that Windows 7 is not support is a flat-out falsehood. Windows 7 is literally supported by Microsoft for another 3.3 years. That's as long as the time between Windows Vista and Windows 7, and Windows 7 and Windows 8, and Windows 8 and Windows 10. There is literally no argument to make to support a claim that Windows 7 is not supported, and claims of such probably amount to deliberate lying for the sake of shilling Windows 10.

 

Quote

Well that's a shame. I guess those games weren't well built.

They were built to their best potential for the time that they released in, like many other great games by renowned studios, that now require additional work to get running properly, and satisfactorily. And the construction of games does nothing to change the reality that many people still want to play older games. Many of them, when they go on sale on Steam, they still go high up the top sellers list.

 

With UWP, a person cannot play a game any more, once it experiences even the most simple and would-be-easily-fixed incompatibility issue, because they can't access the files to make any adjustments. UWP is a flawed design, because it guarantees the eventual failure to be accessible of any product sold within its container. For that very great reason, it makes complete sense that any time which a person could avoid UWP in favour of another platform for their purchases, they would.

 

Quote

Why are you playing a DOS game in 2016? It's like your so desperate to be on this Windows 10 hatred crusade that you need to come up with excuses to justify your opinion.

The same reason why many people are playing DOS games in 2016, and why many people will also be playing them in 2026. It's also why those games continue to be sold on Steam, GoG, Uplay, Origin, and elsewhere: Because they're good and enjoyable to play, and offer different experiences than modern games.

[AlTech]

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Sales are sales, and support is support. They're as different as buying a car from a dealership is from having maintenance work done on it 15 years after it ceased to be sold by the manufacturer. I don't know why you'd conflate the two, other than to deliberately mislead readers. At any rate, any insistence from you that Windows 7 is not support is a flat-out falsehood. Windows 7 is literally supported by Microsoft for another 3.3 years.

Yes. But the nature of the support is not understood by everyone......

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

That's as long as the time between Windows Vista and Windows 7, and Windows 7 and Windows 8, and Windows 8 and Windows 10. There is literally no argument to make to support a claim that Windows 7 is not supported, and claims of such probably amount to deliberate lying for the sake of shilling Windows 10.

 

They were built to their best potential for the time that they released in, like many other great games by renowned studios, that now require additional work to get running properly, and satisfactorily. And the construction of games does nothing to change the reality that many people still want to play older games. Many of them, when they go on sale on Steam, they still go high up the top sellers list.

 

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

With UWP, a person cannot play a game any more, once it experiences even the most simple and would-be-easily-fixed incompatibility issue, because they can't access the files to make any adjustments. UWP is a flawed design, because it guarantees the eventual failure to be accessible of any product sold within its container. For that very great reason, it makes complete sense that any time which a person could avoid UWP in favour of another platform for their purchases, they would.

If a developer cares about their product, they'll patch it and ensure it is fixed.

 

Avoiding UWP is a mistake....... That's all I'm saying on that.

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

The same reason why many people are playing DOS games in 2016, and why many people will also be playing them in 2026. It's also why those games continue to be sold on Steam, GoG, Uplay, Origin, and elsewhere: Because they're good and enjoyable to play, and offer different experiences than modern games.

Have fun playing your outdated legacy game.

[Dabombinable]

2 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Have fun playing your outdated legacy game.

Have fun playing your incomplete modern AAA games with shitloads of DLC.

[Ertyrty]

Good luck getting devs to not support win 7. Oh and screw uwp. Try developing on it.

 

Good thing i have win 10 for free. Will never be trading my own win 7 key even if mshit offered 10 bucks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Delicieuxz]

9 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Avoiding UWP is a mistake....... That's all I'm saying on that.

Because you're sponsored by Microsoft to say that. Buying software that's contained to a platform which gives the software a non-circumventable expiry date is a mistake.

 

Quote

Have fun playing your outdated legacy game.

You ever notice how 'best of' lists for game genres are comprehensively filled with old games? With a comment like yours, you probably haven't.

 

Please, tone down your Windows 10 shilling, which you've taken to absurd, disingenuous, and disrespectful levels. People don't deserve to have you deceive them into installing software that isn't the ideal choice for their systems, their wallets, and their interests in being able to access their software in the long-term, if they ever wish to do so.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Because you're sponsored by Microsoft to say that.

No I'm not....... I'm not paid by anyone for my opinion.

 

If I released a game, it would come to UWP first and then possibly Steam.

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

You ever notice how 'best of' lists for game genres are comprehensively filled with old games? With a comment like yours, you probably haven't.

I don't follow or read "Best of" lists. I make my own decision on what is the best of a category.

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Please, tone down your Windows 10 shilling, which you've taken to absurd, disingenuous, and disrespectful levels.

People don't deserve to have you deceive them into installing software that isn't the ideal choice for their systems, their wallets, and their interests in being able to access their software in the long-term, if they ever wish to do so.

Again, your hatred of Microsoft is showing a lot....

[Delicieuxz]

15 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

I don't follow or read "Best of" lists. I make my own decision on what is the best of a category.

And your opinion of best game happens to always be whatever released latest? You might be the only gamer with such a perspective.

 

Quote

Again, your hatred of Microsoft is showing a lot....

I happen to like Windows 3.1, to Windows 7 quite a lot, and also find Windows 8.1 to be not too bad.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

And your opinion of best game happens to always be whatever released latest? You might be the only gamer with such a perspective.

No. I quite like Minecraft and yet that was released in 2011. I also like, BF4 released in 2013.

 

[Ertyrty]

4 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

If the developer does not update their UWP version but they update the Steam version, that makes them a bad developer/publisher.

 

How are they a bad publisher? Windows Vista and 7 are outdated and legacy products. Windows 8 and 8.1 are also outdated.

 

I see alot of contradiction in those statements. 

 

Why is it good that devs don't support win 7(which has a bigger user base than win 10) but bad if they don't care about uwp? 

 

Shouldn't they be supporting as many platforms as they can?

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Ertyrty said:

 

I see alot of contradiction in those statements. 

 

Why is it good that devs don't support win 7(which has a bigger user base than win 10) but bad if they don't care about uwp? 

UWP is a new next generation platform for apps and games.......

1 minute ago, Ertyrty said:

Shouldn't they be supporting as many platforms as they can?

Windows 7 is supported only because rich greedy corporations require Windows 7 on their machines to function.

[Ertyrty]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

UWP is a new next generation platform for apps and games.......

Windows 7 is supported only because rich greedy corporations require Windows 7 on their machines to function.

 

Next gen but lacking user base. Again why do you say its to bad to support a platform with a bigger user base but good for the other one with less?

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

22 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

I'm just gonna leave this here......

 

 

I'm just gonna leave this here ... again ...

 

Registry hack enables free Windows XP security updates until 2019

 

----

 

@ the mod who deleted it : There is nothing illegal about what I said or linked to, so you had absolutely no reason or right to remove that post.

 

Here's Microsoft's entire statement on the matter :

 

Quote

 

We recently became aware of a hack that purportedly aims to provide security updates to Windows XP customers. The security updates that could be installed are intended for Windows Embedded and Windows Server 2003 customers and do not fully protect Windows XP customers. Windows XP customers also run a significant risk of functionality issues with their machines if they install these updates, as they are not tested against Windows XP. The best way for Windows XP customers to protect their systems is to upgrade to a more modern operating system, like Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.

 

They're not mentioning anywhere that this is not allowed, if anything they're merely trying to convince people to open their wallets to buy new stuff that's even more insecure.

 

Also, this has been reported by just about every major tech news site ( ZDnet , Arstechnica ), so it's not like people didn't know about it already.

Hell, it's been mentioned on LTT several times and there even were 3 topics dedicated to the subject !

 

You didn't delete those, now did you?