Microsoft further cracks down on Kaby Lake and Ryzen usage on Windows 7 and 8.1

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

I'm pretty sure they have lawyers for that.  But, a lot of countries have contract laws.   Again, the key itself is not giving you ownership of a copy.  You're getting licensed a copy to hold onto and use as agreed to.  That doesn't mean you are owning a copy of it.  The install disc is entitling you to that either, you yourself are.  It's not just the EULA alone, but the fact that you put money down and agreed to something.  That alone is a verbal contract.  I highly doubt they're going to enforce it, though unless you start uploading copies for everyone to dl. 

That's my point: They have lawyers, they want people to know they have lawyers and are willing to fight and the EULA is basically a warning about that. 

 

However having lawyers doesn't actually changes the law itself. The legal system has issues many of which can be exploited by lawyers to basically win by default regardless of the law but that itself does not changes the law. 

 

There are distinct legal differences between a product and a licence agreement and Microsoft retail products for consumers more closely resemble products than licences. I understand that it might be pointless to argue that in court with Microsoft because of the aforementioned shortcomings but that doesn't means that you get to say "This is a contract because I say so". There's certain rights and provisions that you cannot renounce even if trying to be compelled to and this is one such case imo.

[Misanthrope]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

They'd probably pay the judge to go against you.  

They wouldn't need to they could just drown me with so many pre-trial proceedings I could not possibly respond to without an army of lawyers at my hand. For example even a very small case of Matt Hoss vs h3h3 was almost lost by them because of pre-trial proceedings that almost got past their lawyers. If you have a Microsoft sized case it would take a smaller firm years to go through all those proceedings while the court usually requires you to answer within days. 

 

If you have an hour or so Leonard French discusses this regarding this case and other cases around youtubers very nice channel:

 

Spoiler

 

 

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

It was known that W7/8.1 wouldn't support Kaby Lake from before Kaby Lake launched. 

It  probably was  I didn't hear about it until the consultants I know told me they got caught out.   

 

I don't understand why some people are insisting MS somehow strong armed hardware manufacturers to cause this.  It just the nature of the beast.  All  hardware and operating systems have this issue at many points in their evolution cycle.

[mr moose]

3 hours ago, cj09beira said:

, i don't want and wont be buying a new copy of windows each time i upgrade my cpu thats crazy,

 

Yeah, I demand MS and hardware makers do the work to allow me to continue using win98SE on my new CPU.   I paid for it, I should be able to use it on any hardware I by for the rest of my life.

 

These things happen, technology advances.  I don't see many people claiming Google duped them by not optimizing the latest android for a ten year old phone.  And before anyone says it not the same thing, it is.  There is no point trying to update one when it isn't supported by the other. 

 

 

[Nowak]

Just now, mr moose said:

 

Yeah, I demand MS and hardware makers do the work to allow me to continue using win98SE on my new CPU.   I paid for it, I should be able to use it on any hardware I by for the rest of my life.

 

These things happen, technology advances.  I don't see many people claiming Google duped them by not optimizing the latest android for a ten year old phone.  And before anyone says it not the same thing, it is.  There is no point trying to update one when it isn't supported by the other. 

If I really wanted to, I could install Windows 2000 on my 4690K machine. I've seen someone run 2000 on a 5820K, it's possible.

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, Daring said:

If I really wanted to, I could install Windows 2000 on my 4690K machine. I've seen someone run 2000 on a 5820K, it's possible.

maybe you could.  That would be an experience I am sure you would enjoy.

[Nowak]

Just now, mr moose said:

maybe you could.  That would be an experience I am sure you would enjoy.

The newest hardware I've run 2000 on is a Core 2 Duo T7200 with 3GB RAM. Surprisingly, it could see both CPU cores.

[jagdtigger]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Actually it is driver support. I'll expand on this

 

1) Linux has far too much fragmentation, to a ridiculous degree

 

2) The corporate side is a lot better thanks to players like Redhat that have managed to create a bit of a standard and well the fact that companies actually have money to hire Linux specialists so the unfriendliness is a non-issue

 

My argument is that the fragmentation is basically because nobody in the Linux consumer community can agree on what to do about the lack of driver support. Some projects might get traction but there's never full backing because far too many purists always argue against proprietary drivers, emulation and abstraction, etc. So the fact that the community is already small gets amplified when truly talented people refuse to participate in these projects and start competing ones because of major, minor and sometimes minute differences in how to address the proprietary world and closed source software.

 

That's why the most successful version of Linux ever is Android: Google took it, modified to keep all the fucking nutcases out and managed to offer something usable to hardware manufacturers and devs alike.

Well actually it could be done, if they make drivers for Debian then that can be ported to a whack ton of other distros that is based on it .

[jaggysnake57]

how much money do you think it costs to "not support" an os? how many people do you think will still try to contact MS with issues related to win 7/8 not working with there cpu?

 

just look how long it took to move people on from XP and there are still some people using it even today.  people were warned about this and they really should stop bitching and move on win 10 is going nowhere and linux is garbage

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Moved from win 10 to win 7 on my Ryzen, we'll see how this goes.

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

how much money do you think it costs to "not support" an os? how many people do you think will still try to contact MS with issues related to win 7/8 not working with there cpu?

 

just look how long it took to move people on from XP and there are still some people using it even today.  people were warned about this and they really should stop bitching and move on win 10 is going nowhere and linux is garbage

More or less I agree,  Intel and AMD will release patches or something. If not the community will release ini hacks to make it all work anyway. 

[jaggysnake57]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

More or less I agree,  Intel and AMD will release patches or something. If not the community will release ini hacks to make it all work anyway. 

more likely there will be community hack for it.  windows 10 is a decent OS i have been running mine since the dev previews and its stable and reliable. people bang on about privacy but for the most part people just like to jump on the bandwagon. seriously if you have such an issue with privacy.....get off the net

[Linus_torvalds]

The only thing that's stopping people from using Linux on their Desktop machines and laptops is lack of games. All problems come from that. If all games that run on windows ran on Linux then many people would use Linux, then many developers would make software for Linux, then even more people would use Linux. That's it. We need all the games on Linux.

 

P.S. I do not play, so i do not need games at all. I need Linux for work and for myself too. So i ditched windows long long ago and i left it far far away

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, mate_mate91 said:

The only thing that's stopping people from using Linux on their Desktop machines and laptops is lack of games. All problems come from that. If all games that run on windows ran on Linux then many people would use Linux, then many developers would make software for Linux, then even more people would use Linux. That's it. We need all the games on Linux.

 

P.S. I do not play, so i do not need games at all. I need Linux for work and for myself too. So i ditched windows long long ago and i left it far far away

I've tried it a few times, usually on pc's that I don't play games on.  he whole process just shit me.  The longest I used it for was about 6 months, in that time all I did was word processing, emails and web surfing.   Anything more than that and it was like using windows RT, in that none of the third party programs I like to use would run, installing drivers and cheap Chinese hardware was nigh on impossible and Getting things to install outside of the repository was just not happening. 

[79wjd]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

It  probably was  I didn't hear about it until the consultants I know told me they got caught out.   

August 2016:

 

48 minutes ago, mate_mate91 said:

The only thing that's stopping people from using Linux on their Desktop machines and laptops is lack of games. All problems come from that. If all games that run on windows ran on Linux then many people would use Linux, then many developers would make software for Linux, then even more people would use Linux. That's it. We need all the games on Linux.

 

P.S. I do not play, so i do not need games at all. I need Linux for work and for myself too. So i ditched windows long long ago and i left it far far away

A lack of games, app support, and general usability. 

 

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

August 2016:

 

A lack of games, app support, and general usability. 

 

HOLY SHIT, just goes to show how far out of the loop one can get.  

[vorticalbox]

17 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

In fairness, Microsoft said from day one that Kaby Lake wouldn't be supported by W7/8.1.

 

I don't see why Microsoft should be expected to support new hardware on an old OS (if they clearly stated before that new hardware launched that it wouldn't be supported).

 

No one likes my analogy apparently. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I also don't really have a problem with this, I don't expect the car I bought last year to support this years engine.

 

be that as it mat, Windows 8.1 is still in main stream support and should have any blocks at all. Windows 7 is end of life so os completely understandable. 

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, vorticalbox said:

be that as it mat, Windows 8.1 is still in main stream support and should have any blocks at all. Windows 7 is end of life so os completely understandable. 

8.1 is under mainstream support but it reached end of sale before Kaby Lake released. I don't think Microsoft should have any obligation to support an old OS, that has reached end of sale, on new hardware if they make the notice of no support before the new hardware launches.

[jagdtigger]

5 minutes ago, vorticalbox said:

be that as it mat, Windows 8.1 is still in main stream support and should have any blocks at all. Windows 7 is end of life so os completely understandable. 

Nope, extended support which means security updates only regardless of HW running it...

 

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

8.1 is under mainstream support but it reached end of sale before Kaby Lake released. I don't think Microsoft should have any obligation to support an old OS, that has reached end of sale, on new hardware if they make the notice of no support before the new hardware launches.

Mainstream support: security and feature updates. Basically it should be actively supported.

[Sauron]

Perhaps there's a way to edit the registry to avoid this?

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Mainstream support: security and feature updates. Basically it should be actively supported.

And it is -- on hardware that was available when W8.1 was for sale. Again, you don't see Jelly Bean being supported on a Galaxy S8 or Mavericks being supported on the 2016 rMBPs.

[Sauron]

4 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

8.1 is under mainstream support but it reached end of sale before Kaby Lake released. I don't think Microsoft should have any obligation to support an old OS, that has reached end of sale, on new hardware if they make the notice of no support before the new hardware launches.

Not supporting it officially is one thing, actively holding back security updates for no good reason is another. I could definitely understand platform specific updates not being ported to win7 and win8, but the updates that have already been ported should be released with no distinction.

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

And it is -- on hardware that was available when W8.1 was for sale. Again, you don't see Jelly Bean being supported on a Galaxy S8 or Mavericks being supported on the 2016 rMBPs.

However neither mavericks nor jelly bean would nag you about it, nor would they artificially prevent you from installing any patch or update that is available on every other system running them (provided you can get them to run on the new hardware). With mobile devices it's a bit more complicated because the image has to be tailor built for the hardware most of the time, not so with mac os or windows.

[79wjd]

Just now, Sauron said:

Not supporting it officially is one thing, actively holding back security updates for no good reason is another. I could definitely understand platform specific updates not being ported to win7 and win8, but the updates that have already been ported should be released with no distinction.

 

However neither mavericks nor jelly bean would nag you about it, nor would they artificially prevent you from installing any patch or update that is available on every other system running them (provided you can get them to run on the new hardware). With mobile devices it's a bit more complicated because the image has to be tailor built for the hardware most of the time, not so with mac os or windows.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, upsetting customers by telling them they can't use KL and W7 is a LOT better PR than allowing them to receive updates that could break their system and then telling them to fuck off with any problems. 

 

What is W7/8.1 nagging you about exactly? You're using unsupported hardware that was known to be unsupported from long before Kaby Lake ever launched. W7/8.1 will only stop you from installing updates on unsupported hardware -- you can't even install Jelly Bean on an S8 or Mavericks on the 2016 Macs without serious modifications. Windows still requires hardware drivers and updates need to be validated. 

[jagdtigger]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

And it is -- on hardware that was available when W8.1 was for sale. Again, you don't see Jelly Bean being supported on a Galaxy S8 or Mavericks being supported on the 2016 rMBPs.

Well i dont remember MS tying anything to CPU other than the OEM licences, especially not updates . They just want to force anyone onto their data harvesting tool. Nothing else is behind this.

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

Well i dont remember MS tying anything to CPU other than the OEM licences, especially not updates . They just want to force anyone onto their data harvesting tool. Nothing else is behind this.

Yes, they want everyone on Windows 10. No shit. 

 

Windows 7/8.1 also harvest your data.