RyZen will get official Windows 7 support

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Rangaman42 said:

I totally agree, and you've summed up my experience with 10.

 

The upgrade process was really fast, installed straight over Windows 8 with no issues at all. I never got the pop ups, as I installed into the beta, there was no random installing, I never get interrupted with updates (Steam is the one running random updates while I'm trying to work), and nothing is broken.

Quite honestly, my biggest beef is with the Settings app. I get that it's more simple than Control Panel, but it's annoying to have my settings split between them. And that's my only issue. The people having failed installs or glitchy start menus etc must have already had underlying issues in their config, that's the only answer I can think of when the 4 machines I've upgraded/built with 10 have all performed perfectly.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, that post-clean install, I think I needed to fetch one driver from a website to complete my system with 10, but with 7, I needed to install virtually everything ASUS offered manually. 

[HelplmChoking]

3 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Oh, and I forgot to mention, that post-clean install, I think I needed to fetch one driver from a website to complete my system with 10, but with 7, I needed to install virtually everything ASUS offered manually. 

 

Oh I didn't even do a clean install  just used the upgrade tool.

[Mihle]

Microsoft didn't pay AMD enough.

[SCHISCHKA]

5 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

No actually I didn't. End of MAINSTREAM support means no online/phone/tech support for non-enterprise customers.

when was the last time you called MS for tech support? Are you telling me you cannot use windows 7 without making a phone call to MS? end of mainstream support does not mean the product is at end of life. Windows 7 is not in the same state as windows xp. you need to correct your definition of end of life. windows 7 is still supported by MS.

Quote

 

24. What is the difference between Mainstream Support, Extended Support, and Self-help Online Support for software products? 

 

Type of support	Mainstream Support	Extended Support	Self-help Online Support
Request to change product design and features	Available	Not Available	Note4
Security updates	Available	Available	Note4
Non-security updates	Available	Only available with Extended Hotfix Support Not available for desktop consumer products	Note4
Complimentary support1 included with license, licensing program2 or other no-charge support programs	Available	Not Available3	Note4
Paid-support (including pay-per-incident Premier and Essential Support)	Available	Available	Note4
Product-specific information and answers to technical questions via Microsoft Knowledge Base or Microsoft Help and Support	Available	Available	Note4

*Please Note: The Microsoft Lifecycle Policy does not apply to all products. To see the specific lifecycle start and end dates by applicable product, you can search the Lifecycle Product Database.

1 Refers to phone support and online support options.
2 For example, support incidents acquired through the Software Assurance program for server products. 
3 Limited complimentary support may be available (varies by product).
4 Access to freely available online content, such as Knowledge Base articles, online product information, and online support webcasts

 

[Drak3]

@Ryan_Vickers @Rangaman42

Building off of this, I've never had an issue with Windows 10 that was due to Windows 10, even on day 1. Every issue has been due to either:

A) Outdated hardware

B) Unstable hardware combinations

C) Early, buggy firmware

D) Bad drivers

 

I can't say the same for Vista, 7, or 8 though. Although, 8 has matured quite well stability wise, UI and UX are still a love it or hate it affair, IMO.

[Space Reptile]

2 hours ago, 2Buck said:

Annnnd boom, Ryzen wins my upgrade. I wasn't even gonna bother with it because I'm not going to 10. I was gonna go to Skylake when used prices came down a little for my next upgrade because of how much I despise 10, but now I can go Ryzen! Well, if the pricing is right. PLEASE AMD, you are set up for complete victory, if you get this pricing right you'll have it in the bag. Imagine, Ryzen being 60%ish of the price tag with OS freedom. Now I'm hyped again.

the highest end chip is allegedly 720$ ( SR7 8c/16t 4.something ghz or so ) 

[Okjoek]

8 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Don't jump the gun on that. If I am correct that the highest end APUs are going to see 460-470 levels of performance, they're going to draw a decent amount of power (so you'll need to opt for a more expensive board that'll handle the power delivery without going thermonuclear in a month), and probably ship as a quad core at the highest capacity.

For moderate gaming, the APU's would be fine, but they're not exactly ideal for "futureproofing" if we're starting the transition into consumer 6c/12t and 8c/16t processors (not the prosumer offerings of Intel that cost a small fortune in the end).

Do you think I could put an APU like that on a mITX motherboard as long as I didn't plan on overclocking? I'd imagine a Wraith cooler would do the job. Combine that with an M.2 SSD and I could make one mean tiny PC. Build my own tiny case for it that I could squeeze an SFX PSU alongside it.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Okjoek said:

Do you think I could put an APU like that on a mITX motherboard as long as I didn't plan on overclocking? I'd imagine a Wraith cooler would do the job. Combine that with an M.2 SSD and I could make one mean tiny PC. Build my own tiny case for it that I could squeeze an SFX PSU alongside it.

Maybe, but temps would be a bit on the high side. I'd step it up to one of Noctua's offerings, or a smallish AiO

[Okjoek]

6 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Maybe, but temps would be a bit on the high side. I'd step it up to one of Noctua's offerings, or a smallish AiO

 

Maybe the NH-L12? I think that's one of their biggest "low profile" coolers. One of my concerns for such a tiny PC is that it would be moved around a lot. Would an AIO cooler be at any risk of leaking from being manhandled?

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Okjoek said:

 

Maybe the NH-L12? I think that's one of their biggest "low profile" coolers. One of my concerns for such a tiny PC is that it would be moved around a lot. Would an AIO cooler be at any risk of leaking from being manhandled?

A decent one won't see any risk of leakage, unless you tend to throw it or yank on the tubing a bit.

[Delicieuxz]

AMD re-states that Ryzen has Windows 7 support: http://www.hardocp.com/news/2017/02/02/amd_ryzen_windows_7_driver_support

 

In response to HardForum's Kyle asking AMD about the claim made in the German article that's linked-to in the OP of this thread, AMD responded:

Quote

Yes, we have drivers for win 7 today on the AM4 platform because we enabled 7th gen A-series for dell, HP, Lenovo etc last year with the launch of our AMD 7th Generation A-series processors.

So, it looks like it was done largely for the sake of businesses, considering that HP, Lenovo, and Dell are, from what I've read, common choices for businesses.

[LAwLz]

10 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Vagueness is what you're going to have to deal with for the most part. Windows is proprietary and seeing the changes to the kernel are mostly from observing their affects, not being able to actually see change logs and patch notes like you can on Linux.

Then how can you be sure that they have actually changed things?

If you (I know it wasn't you but for some reason you jumped in) say that Vista to 7 had basically no changes, but 7 to 8 had major differences in the kernel then you should have at least a little bit of facts to back your statement up with. You can't hide behind "it's proprietary so we don't know what changed" when you're the one saying things has changed.

It's like saying Santa Claus is real and when asked for evidence go "well it's magic, I don't have to explain shit".

 

10 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

An example of an externally exposed change though is the Windows Display Driver Model which is the driver interface for graphics drivers. You can read up on the differences between WDDM 1.1 (Windows 7), 1.3 (Windows 8), and 2.0 (Windows 10) for a basic look at the changes under the hood.

WDDM was changed between Windows Vista and Windows 7 as well. What is your point?

And yes, WDDM 1.1 was backported to Vista afterwards, but even then it still doesn't support everything that is supported in 7 such as rendering GDI calls in hardware.

 

10 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Can also look at the similar differences in NDIS 6.20-6.50 for differences in the network driver interface model.

No no no no. You made the argument. You back it up. I should not do your research to prove your point.

(By the way, Windows 7 has a different version of NDIS compared to Vista too)

 

10 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

There's also the RAM compression kernel module and Windows Subsystem for Linux kernel changes.

RAM compression was introduced in Windows 10, not 8.

 

[Citation Needed] on Windows 8 having "Windows Subsystem for Linux kernel changes".

I assume you are referring to Interix, but the latest version of that (6.1) runs on Windows 7 too, and support was completely dropped for versions after Windows 8 and I think it was removed in Windows 8.1.

So I guess you are right in that they made "changes" to it. They completely removed it.

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Fact of the matter though is because of the proprietary nature of NT you'll never get to see most of the kernel development and for the most parts all people will be able to provide for what's changed is vague open ended answers.

Your answers and only vague if you don't know what you're talking about. If you don't know what you're talking about then you shouldn't say anything to begin with.

If your statements are based on facts, and you want to argue that X is better than Y, then you need facts and evidence to support your stance. If all you got are vague "well I think they changed something, but I don't know what or why, but I am sure it is better!" then quite frankly you should shut the hell up.

 

 

I am sick and tired of people who doesn't know the first thing about operating systems tell others how much better X is than Y, when they don't have any facts to back their statements up with. And yes, it's not just Windows fanboys I am sick and tired of. I've been hearing "OS X is great because it's Unix! It's the most advanced OS in the world!" and "I use Linux because it is better than Windows" for over a decade now, and every time I ask people why they said that statement they have no fucking idea what they are talking about 90% of the time. It is very rare that I get a real answer. It seems like 90% of people think OS 1 is better than OS 2 because some other clueless idiot told them it was better, and they never questioned it. Or they did question it but then they didn't understand the answer and just went "wow he sounds smart because I have no idea what he just said. I'll just parrot what he said then I might sound smart too!"

 

 

@Curufinwe_wins I am waiting on clarifications and answers.

[Trik'Stari]

This makes sense. As a company you wouldn't cut out 47% of the market just because M$ wants you to.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

 

Unless you're intel and you don't give a shit because you have Brinks trucks of money just sitting around.

 

You don't spite 47% of the market in favor of 25% of the market when you could just support both.

[Sniperfox47]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

~snip~

I think you're conflating my comments with those of Curufinwe_wins.

 

Windows Subsystem for Linux and RAM Compression were indeed both from Windows 10. I was referencing some differences between Windows 10 and 7 that illustrates at least basic differences.

 

Likewise I never argued that Windows 7 and Vista were more similar at the kernel level than Windows 7 and 8. From a userland perspective I would agree, but from a kernel perspective, eh not so much.

 

Updated driver models, and changes to interprocess security, and process priority handling are all changes that as a third party developer you can clearly see. That's why they're the kinds of things me and Curufinwe_wins pointed them out.

 

As far as evidence, I provided it. The NDIS model and WDDM has substantial changes in Windows 8, and then more substantial changes in Windows 10. What more do you want me to do? Link you to the wikipedia article describing high level feature differences? I can do that: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model Want me to grab you the msdn reference for you? Here it is: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff570593(v=vs.85).aspx Both of those were a 2 second Google search away. If you expect me to go diving through their hardware guides to grab you page references and index a precise change log of every API hook revision and regression between them though, you're deluded. I have better things to do with my time than waste it on reenforcing a point that is made by simply saying "Hey look, theres a new driver model, so there are clearly at least *some* changes in the kernel" which was my whole point.

[LAwLz]

25 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

I think you're conflating my comments with those of Curufinwe_wins.

I don't, which I why I said:

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

If you (I know it wasn't you but for some reason you jumped in)

 

25 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Windows Subsystem for Linux and RAM Compression were indeed both from Windows 10. I was referencing some differences between Windows 10 and 7 that illustrates at least basic differences.

Yes, but conversation started with Curfinewe_wins saying that Vista and 7 were almost identical, but Windows 7 to Windows 8 were significantly different, and then he said that Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 are almost identical kernel wise. He even went as far as to insult other people who didn't agree with his statement.

I can sit here and point out difference between the OSes all day if I want, but I want him to explain his position because:

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I am sick and tired of people who doesn't know the first thing about operating systems tell others how much better X is than Y, when they don't have any facts to back their statements up with. And yes, it's not just Windows fanboys I am sick and tired of. I've been hearing "OS X is great because it's Unix! It's the most advanced OS in the world!" and "I use Linux because it is better than Windows" for over a decade now, and every time I ask people why they said that statement they have no fucking idea what they are talking about 90% of the time. It is very rare that I get a real answer. It seems like 90% of people think OS 1 is better than OS 2 because some other clueless idiot told them it was better, and they never questioned it. Or they did question it but then they didn't understand the answer and just went "wow he sounds smart because I have no idea what he just said. I'll just parrot what he said then I might sound smart too!"

 

25 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Updated driver models, and changes to interprocess security, and process priority handling are all changes that as a third party developer you can clearly see. That's why they're the kinds of things me and Curufinwe_wins pointed them out.

[Citation Needed]

Also, Curufinewe never pointed anything out. He just cited you as his source. You pointed it out, and he tried to fit your statement into his previous statement which you don't seem to agree with (that Vista and 7 are almost identical kernel wise, 8.1 and 10 are almost identical kernel wise, but 7 and 8.1 are very different).

 

25 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

I have better things to do with my time than waste it on reenforcing a point that is made by simply saying "Hey look, theres a new driver model, so there are clearly at least *some* changes in the kernel" which was my whole point.

Yes, but there were *some* changes between Vista and 7 too. That was my point.

I know that there were changes made between 7 and 8.1, and even to 10. The thing is that Curufinewe said that the changes only happened between 7 and 8.1, not Vista to 7 or 8.1 to 10.

 

It seems to me like you jumped into this conversation between Curufinewe and me, and decided to be against me even though we agree far more than you and Curufinewe does.

 

 

 

Here is his original statement in case you forgot what it was:

On 2017-02-02 at 7:39 AM, Curufinwe_wins said:

Lol you showed your own complete and utter ignorance with that display.

 

Windows 7 IS VISTA. It is nigh identical to Vista on the kernel level, and 8 through 10 are notable and significant departures from the vista/7 kernel (with 10 sharing as similar a kernel to 8.1 as 7 does to Vista).

[Sniperfox47]

20 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't, which I why I said:

 

Yes, but conversation started with Curfinewe_wins saying that Vista and 7 were almost identical, but Windows 7 to Windows 8 were significantly different, and then he said that Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 are almost identical kernel wise. He even went as far as to insult other people who didn't agree with his statement.

I can sit here and point out difference between the OSes all day if I want, but I want him to explain his position because:

 

[Citation Needed]

Also, Curufinewe never pointed anything out. He just cited you as his source. You pointed it out, and he tried to fit your statement into his previous statement which you don't seem to agree with (that Vista and 7 are almost identical kernel wise, 8.1 and 10 are almost identical kernel wise, but 7 and 8.1 are very different).

 

Yes, but there were *some* changes between Vista and 7 too. That was my point.

I know that there were changes made between 7 and 8.1, and even to 10. The thing is that Curufinewe said that the changes only happened between 7 and 8.1, not Vista to 7 or 8.1 to 10.

 

It seems to me like you jumped into this conversation between Curufinewe and me, and decided to be against me even though we agree far more than you and Curufinewe does.

 

 

 

Here is his original statement in case you forgot what it was:

I'm not against you. I disagreed with a few things you said, and figured that our discussion was independent of his. Sorry if it didn't come off that way. I am however defensive because you quoted me and asked for more evidence for an argument that I never made. Maybe your comments were directed at Curfinewe_wins, but when you're replying under a quote of me it doesn't come off that way.

[LAwLz]

7 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

I'm not against you. I disagreed with a few things you said, and figured that our discussion was independent of his. Sorry if it didn't come off that way. I am however defensive because you quoted me and asked for more evidence for an argument that I never made. Maybe your comments were directed at Curfinewe_wins, but when you're replying under a quote of me it doesn't come off that way.

Well our conversation was kind of independent, but then he started using your post as a source which kind of forced me to argue against you while he ran away with his tail between his legs.

 

I don't think you did disagree with me though.

Your three points were:

1) Things did change between Windows 7 and Windows 8, which I agree with. What I didn't agree with was that there were next to no kernel changes between Vista and 7, nor any between 8.1 and 10. That all the changes were made between 7 and 8.1.

 

2) That CVE was just tracking fixed vulnerabilities, which it isn't. It tracks all public ones, regardless of if they are fixed or not.

 

3) About the support of Windows 7. You said that it's extended support only which I agree with. Nothing to argue about there. What I did argue against was calling Windows 7 end of life, which it clearly isn't since Microsoft's own definition of Windows lifecycle includes extended support. You don't call something dead while it is still going though its lifecycle.

 

 

@Curufinwe_wins Still waiting on answers by the way, and I won't give up. Your post was the straw that broke the camel's back regarding Windows 10 apologists on this website.

[Sniperfox47]

18 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Why are you lying? CVE is not just for fixed vulnerabilities. It lists all publicly known vulnerabilities, no matter if they are fixed or not. I don't understand why the Windows 10 fanbase lie so much, but it is really pissing me off.

Stop defending Windows 10 by making things up.

 

One example of this is CVE-2016-1281.

This vulnerability was reported to the developers 2016-07-01. Since no response was given, the vulnerability went public (and got assigned a CVE number) 2016-07-17. It is quite common that people make vulnerabilities publicly known when developers ignores them (Microsoft has gotten pissed at Google's Project zero for this several times). That puts pressure on the developers to fix the issues.

 

And yes, it does include "outstanding vulnerabilities". It includes ALL PUBLICLY KNOWN VULNERABILITIES. NO EXCEPTIONS.

Also oops, sorry, that was my bad. I was remembering the post on here wrong when I clicked that article and didn't actually reread through it. That was entirely my bad.

 

I should have said it was simply a list of discovered vulnerabilities and not a list of what was fixed, or ones that had been outstanding from prior. It also doesn't include a breakdown of the severity of those vulnerabilities. Using that as a report of how secure an OS still has issues whether it's a total of vulnerabilities found or a total of vulnerabilities fixed.

 

Edit: Guess this is what I get for doing forum posts in the middle of a 12 hour night shift. Arguments with someone whom I don't even disagree with

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Glad to see at least one company thinks about full-sized desktop users who haven't developed an excessive tolerance to abuse from continuous mobile OS exposure.

[Misanthrope]

17 hours ago, Rangaman42 said:

I totally agree, and you've summed up my experience with 10.

 

The upgrade process was really fast, installed straight over Windows 8 with no issues at all. I never got the pop ups, as I installed into the beta, there was no random installing, I never get interrupted with updates (Steam is the one running random updates while I'm trying to work), and nothing is broken.

Quite honestly, my biggest beef is with the Settings app. I get that it's more simple than Control Panel, but it's annoying to have my settings split between them. And that's my only issue. The people having failed installs or glitchy start menus etc must have already had underlying issues in their config, that's the only answer I can think of when the 4 machines I've upgraded/built with 10 have all performed perfectly.

So the only answer you can think of is that because you had no problems with 4 machines the literally MILLIONS of people who did/do have issues are doing something wrong?

 

Please read this and become familiar with it before posting such non-arguments in favor of things you can't possibly know https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

[Curufinwe_wins]

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

snip

I haven't even bothered reading the rest of the quotes from me.

 

But here is a hilariously low level info on SOME of the published changes with Windows 7 to 8.

 

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/138177-under-the-hood-of-windows-8-or-why-desktop-users-should-upgrade-from-windows-7

 

(I'd link a lmgtfy, but that isn't allowed.)

[patrickjp93]

Why does everyone think Kaby Lake doesn't have Win 7 support? There is no such thing as a driver for the CPU. There is nothing that can cause the install to fail on a newer chip. You could make an argument for new motherboard busses, but Win 7 is TB3 and USB 3.1 aware anyway...

 

This article is pure clickbait.

[Drak3]

5 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Why does everyone think Kaby Lake doesn't have Win 7 support? There is no such thing as a driver for the CPU. There is nothing that can cause the install to fail on a newer chip. You could make an argument for new motherboard busses, but Win 7 is TB3 and USB 3.1 aware anyway...

 

This article is pure clickbait.

Because without drivers for Kaby Lake, Windows 7 and 8.1 cannot make full use of the "new architecture" and have some minor issues that are not present on Skylake, or Windows 10 doesn't experience (even though Win10 drivers can be brute forced to 7 and 8 and work well).

Microsoft and Intel also announced that Kaby Lake wouldn't be supporting any Windows OS below 10.

 

JayzTwoCents showed us what can happen when trying to run Win8 on Kaby Lake (although OC'd, but stable in 10). It had some issues, still usable, but more issues than it should have.

 

[AresKrieger]

On 2/1/2017 at 5:53 PM, Space Reptile said:

snip

Well this changes my opinion of Ryzen a little, if it performs well then I might use it for a friend's build

 

On 2/1/2017 at 6:06 PM, VerticalDiscussions said:

Ah come on, just get Windows 10 already. Its free .-.

 

#WasFree

If it was stable and didn't undo regedits every update I'd have it but it seems to hate me so I will never use it.

[AresKrieger]

15 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Why does everyone think Kaby Lake doesn't have Win 7 support? There is no such thing as a driver for the CPU. There is nothing that can cause the install to fail on a newer chip. You could make an argument for new motherboard busses, but Win 7 is TB3 and USB 3.1 aware anyway...

 

This article is pure clickbait.

Because intel said it wouldn't support it, also its the motherboard that would be the issue not the cpu

Edited February 3, 2017 by AresKrieger