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

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

This little plus wasnt there AFAIK:

 

But its funny how they say limited support, and in reality they just outright blocked them X'D....

I'd say that's clarifying something rather than going back on their word. Going back on their word would require them to explicitly say or at least strongly imply that all hardware will always be supported as long as it's relesed within the support period. 

4 minutes ago, Centurius said:

Neither is actively harassing paid users of your product to upgrade to a new version that they don't want.

Yeah, well, one shit decision doesn't make another better.

[Mooshi]

Quote

Linux, which is becoming a viable alternative

[jagdtigger]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I'd say that's clarifying something rather than going back on their word.

Yeah, well, one shit decision doesn't make another better.

Its a modification after they promised full support until January 9, 2018  for 8.1 and security updates for January 14, 2020 without any restrictions on hardware. So yeah, they did gone back on their word...

 

@Mooshi

For the majority it is, they can use their websites, read e-mail, watch videos etc....

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

Its a modification after they promised full support until January 9, 2018  for 8.1 and security updates for January 14, 2020 without any restrictions on hardware. So yeah, they did gone back on their word

I don't see how that's going back on their word. They never promised they would support hardware that doesn't exist. As far as I'm concerned they only need to support hardware that existed at the time of end of sale.

[themctipers]

18 hours ago, H0R53 said:

Wrong on more levels than you know

 

I have a custom kernel on my S4 geared towards battery and undervolting, it's not hard, go on XDA forums and you'll see. Android is open sauce, you can do whatever the fuck you want with it

 

Windows 10 has so many useless built in apps and services that are randomly running they affect performance. On a fresh install of 7, on 4gb of RAM idle at maybe 15% usage, and 0% CPU. W10, random ass spikes in disk and CPU, fans spin up unnecesarily, etc. 50% CPU, 25% ram at any given time on same system

 

FTFY

 

Again, every iteration of the Windows kernel performs slower than the last, not better. Windows XP x64 will be 50x faster than W10, hands down. Now Xp only supports DX9 max, so that's a bummer

 

In many ways it is, except for DX10 and DX11 support is nil. Other than that...

 

The point I made from the beginning

 

Devs are too lazy to make GUIs and then use CURL anyway

 

Not the point.

 

Doubt that

 

Not just Ryzen. It handles my Xeon better and dual CPUs in either AMD or Intel better

can confirm, basement pc with q9650 idles at 1% cpu usage and 700mb ram usage

windows 10 randomy spikes in cpu/ram/disk, and there are plenty of topics here that ask if this is normal 

[jagdtigger]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

I don't see how that's going back on their word. They never promised they would support hardware that doesn't exist. As far as I'm concerned they only need to support hardware that existed at the time of end of sale.

You still missing the point, when i said without restrictions on HW i meant that there was no provisions allowing MS to just show the middle finger and cut the support when they detect newer HW...

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

You still missing the point, when i said without restrictions on HW i meant that there was no provisions allowing MS to just show the middle finger and cut the support when they detect newer HW...

You can still install drivers and updates straight from the manufacturers.

[Mooshi]

3 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

 

 

@Mooshi

For the majority it is, they can use their websites, read e-mail, watch videos etc....

That's what your smartphone is for. I like Linux, but it will never be a Windows replacement so long as key programs remain Windows only for some. People don't like fiddling with things that only half work and WINE can only do so much.

[79wjd]

6 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

You still missing the point, when i said without restrictions on HW i meant that there was no provisions allowing MS to just show the middle finger and cut the support when they detect newer HW...

There was also nothing requiring them to support hardware. 

[Jito463]

3 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Well i dont remember MS tying anything to CPU other than the OEM licences

Actually, the licenses are tied to the motherboard, not the CPU.

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Actually, the licenses are tied to the motherboard, not the CPU.

On Windows 10, they're tied to the Microsoft account. All past iterations were tied to the motherboard.

[Jito463]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

On Windows 10, they're tied to the Microsoft account. All past iterations were tied to the motherboard.

Actually, they can be tied to your account, but with a local login it will still tie to your motherboard, just as before.

[H0R53]

10 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

On Windows 10, they're tied to the Microsoft account. All past iterations were tied to the motherboard.

 

9 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Actually, they can be tied to your account, but with a local login it will still tie to your motherboard, just as before.

 

remember SLIC? Most older Dells and a lot of laptops have SLIC to avoid problems when using the OEM recovery partition.

[Jito463]

1 minute ago, H0R53 said:

remember SLIC? Most older Dells and a lot of laptops have SLIC to avoid problems when using the OEM recovery partition.

I was referring to purchased licenses, either OEM (system builder) or retail.  The larger OEM's like Dell/HP/Asus/Acer/Lenovo/et al have a different licensing scheme setup with MS.

[Mr.Meerkat]

19 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

The problem with Linux is that it's a lot less user-friendly than Windows.  Sure, you have support, better security, and so on!  However, you're lacking heavy developer support backed by having to use a terminal quite a lot for commands.  Do you really think people actually want to deal with the terminal when they can just click buttons on Windows that do the same thing?  If Linux wasn't too dependent on the terminal and had more developer support then yes more people would switch to it.

MacOS?  

[79wjd]

9 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

MacOS?  

If only macOS supported gaming, I'd hackintosh my desktop so quickly. 

[H0R53]

10 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

MacOS?  

I hope you're joking

 

As soon as Windows reaches EoL I'm moving to Ubuntu.

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

I really don't consider myself part of the Windows defense force seeing as I actually hate using Windows, but that also doesn't mean I agree with all the bitching towards this decision. Yes, Microsoft clearly did it for their own interests, but as far as I'm concerned, they haver every right to do so and never promised anything more. I don't see why mainstream support would include supporting hardware that wasn't even released until well after the end of sale date. 

Just so you know. I have not read this thread carefully so I was not talking about you specifically.

 

Anyway, Microsoft has the right to do this (I assume), but that does not make it OK, and "they are allowed to" does not mean it should be accepted.

 

Why would mainstream support include supporting hardware that wasn't released at launch? Because it does not require extra work from Microsoft. Microsoft actually has to work MORE to ensure that it doesn't work, than they do to make it work. It is up to the hardware manufacturers to support hardware. Microsoft should not be some kind of gatekeeper that actively tries to shut the gate to make people buy their newer OS.

That's just pure evil.

 

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

The point about W7 telemetry is that at this point most of the people complaining about W10 who are running w7/8.1 are running updated versions with full telemetry enabled. 

That is an assumption you make. Also, I haven't checked it but I doubt even a fully patched Windows 7 contains as much telemetry and other data harvesting as Windows 10 does (telemetry is far from the only data Microsoft collects).

 

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Steam is constantly patching its client for hardware-specific issues, so Microsoft does need to actively support a processor when it writes updates, and if they're not going to be doing that then they shouldn't allow those updates out in the wild where it will only create a PR nightmare.

[Citation Needed]

I can see Steam needing to update for hardware-specific things because of in-home streaming. But that's adding new hardware-based features to their client. It is not for security updates.

 

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Again, of course the motivation behind all of this is Windows 10. But I'd rather see them block updates then push out updates that they're not going to provide support with. 

I disagree. Since there are clearly two camps about this, how about Microsoft give users the choice?

Since they have already spent quite some time and money implementing this I doubt adding a simple dialog box would be too much effort. It would take like 10 minutes.

 

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

It would be more like Android saying they're too lazy to make Kit Kat support an SD835.

No it would not. Because the updates are already compatible with the newer processors.

What you have to realize is that the updates already work on newer processors. This is Microsoft REMOVING compatibility, not refusing to add new compatibility. Those are two extremely different things.

[jagdtigger]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

You can still install drivers and updates straight from the manufacturers.

Updates for windows? That would be a disaster(one of the drawbacks of android), BTW MS made sure that even if you download it from their website(not through WU) that wont install either...

 

1 hour ago, Mooshi said:

That's what your smartphone is for. I like Linux, but it will never be a Windows replacement so long as key programs remain Windows only for some. People don't like fiddling with things that only half work and WINE can only do so much.

Yeah there are some use cases where windows is the only choice but the r=1 user's case isnt one...  Plus in their case the learning curve isnt that steep IMHO.

13 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Why would mainstream support include supporting hardware that wasn't released at launch? Because it does not require extra work from Microsoft. Microsoft actually has to work MORE to ensure that it doesn't work, than they do to make it work. It is up to the hardware manufacturers to support hardware. Microsoft should not be some kind of gatekeeper that actively tries to shut the gate to make people buy their newer OS.

That's just pure evil.

You are right on that one but to be fair there are cases when MS has some homework(implementing new instruction sets, new HW functions that also needs OS support, etc).

Edited May 7, 2017 by jagdtigger

[Jito463]

13 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

That's you, not everyone

Hence why I said, 'Speaking personally'.

[LAwLz]

39 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

You are right on that one but to be fair there are cases when MS has some homework(implementing new instruction sets, new HW functions that also needs OS support, etc).

They do not change instruction set or new HW features for programs in security updates.

Remember, security updates is all that Windows 7 will receive since it is on extended support.

[jagdtigger]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

They do not change instruction set or new HW features for programs in security updates.

Remember, security updates is all that Windows 7 will receive since it is on extended support.

No but they have to update the kernel so it can use it. But this is only relevant for 8.1 ofc...

[ashypanda]

2 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

On Windows 10, they're tied to the Microsoft account. All past iterations were tied to the motherboard.

it's tied to the motherboard, but if you tie the key to an account, you can move the key to a different motherboard, so technically you could move a key to a new system, but then you are forced to use a microsoft account, but that's a small price to pay for not having to give them £200 for a W10 pro licence.

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

[Citation Needed]

I can see Steam needing to update for hardware-specific things because of in-home streaming. But that's adding new hardware-based features to their client. It is not for security updates.

 

I disagree. Since there are clearly two camps about this, how about Microsoft give users the choice?

Since they have already spent quite some time and money implementing this I doubt adding a simple dialog box would be too much effort. It would take like 10 minutes.

 

No it would not. Because the updates are already compatible with the newer processors.

What you have to realize is that the updates already work on newer processors. This is Microsoft REMOVING compatibility, not refusing to add new compatibility. Those are two extremely different things.

Back when Microsoft was going to cut support for Skylake (months after Skylake was out, that was a bullshit decision), Terry Myerson said that W7/8.1 would get only the most critical updates if it didn't cause problems. To me that implies there is at least some validation going on.

Quote

After July 2017, the most critical Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 security updates will be addressed for these configurations, and will be released if the update does not risk the reliability or compatibility of the Windows 7/8.1 platform on other devices.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/3183583/microsoft-windows/microsoft-will-kill-some-windows-7-and-81-support-in-april.html

 

Giving a choice also means they'll have to deal with the backlash from telling people to 'fuck off' with any problems. So I could understand why they wouldn't want to give people a choice. But still, the main motivation behind all of this is Windows 10.

 

Presumably W7 updates are compatible unless a security update breaks something that they would have to go back and fix or just say fuck it. But W8.1 is still under mainstream support, so it will/could get new features that could break compatibility.

 

Of course this is only Windows 10, but the same should apply to any update for any version of windows where changes are made: 

Quote

Of course Microsoft also performs extensive internal testing, with engineering teams installing new builds daily, and larger groups of employees installing builds frequently, all before those builds are ever released to the Windows Insider Program.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/deployment/update/waas-overview

[LAwLz]

37 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Back when Microsoft was going to cut support for Skylake (months after Skylake was out, that was a bullshit decision), Terry Myerson said that W7/8.1 would get only the most critical updates if it didn't cause problems. To me that implies there is at least some validation going on.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/3183583/microsoft-windows/microsoft-will-kill-some-windows-7-and-81-support-in-april.html

That's not what I asked for. Give me a source that confirms that Steam has to code update for specific processors and/or chipsets. And the updates should be security updates and not adding new features such as support for the media encoding block in Skylake (that's adding new features, not security updates for old ones).

 

And that is a really weak argument too. Microsoft implied that they do some validation, does not mean they have to do validation for specific processors. Again, we have standards which ensures compatibility. Like I said before, do you honestly think that Mozilla codes every update for Firefox so that it works on every single processor it can run on? Or do you think that they adhere to standards which means that if it works on one processor, it works on a wide range of processors?

 

Again, we are talking about security updates. They are not introducing support for new instructions sets, or adding hardware based features. We're talking about standard security patches.

 

 

37 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Giving a choice also means they'll have to deal with the backlash from telling people to 'fuck off' with any problems. So I could understand why they wouldn't want to give people a choice. But still, the main motivation behind all of this is Windows 10.

You're not making any sense here. So according to you, blocking updates outright will generate less backlash than giving users the choice to install updates but at the risk of it not working? That is fucking bullshit and you know it. There is already a backlash so clearly they have not avoided it. In fact, judging by this thread there are many users who would be less pissed if they were given the choice. And besides, what kind of shitty argument is that? You're basically saying:

"Having known vulnerabilities on your computer is better than having a minuscule risk of an update breaking something on your system".

Why are you trying to justify the risk of having an issue by saying it is better to 100% guaranteed have an issue? It's not.

Microsoft denying their paying customers security updates guarantees that people are at risk. People would be safer installing unverified updates than to not get any updates at all.

 

37 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Presumably W7 updates are compatible unless a security update breaks something that they would have to go back and fix or just say fuck it. But W8.1 is still under mainstream support, so it will/could get new features that could break compatibility.

Again, terrible argument.

"Ohh if they introduce a new feature in Windows 8.1, which they are contractually obligated to do, then something might break and then they would have to put in more work which surely they shouldn't have to do!".

If your product is still in the support period then you have to support it, no matter how much work it takes. That is what being supported means. If Microsoft did not want to support their products for this long then they should not have put it in their contracts that they will support it. You can not prematurely drop support while claiming that you still support it.

 

 

There are no excuses for what Microsoft is doing!

Stop defending business practices which are deliberately trying to harm consumers!

 

 

And no, you are defending Microsoft here. Not only are you defending Microsoft, but you are also telling people who are upset that they are just bitching and should just let Microsoft keep kicking them in the face.

It is because of people like you that companies gets away with treating consumers like shit.

I think you should either grow some balls and start standing up for consumers, or you should keep your opinions to yourself. Because you voicing your opinions is harming others. I don't think you understand how dangerous the things you are doing are. You're actively contributing to making the world a worse place, and I hope that my post will open your eyes and make you realize the damage you are causing.

And sure, you alone might not be causing that much damage, but you and the other people who are saying the same things are definitely doing damage.

 

I am actually scared of how compliant people these days are even when they understand that they are being treated like shit. When did everyone lose their spines and sense of what is right and wrong?

 

If a company does something that harms their consumers they should be ridiculed. Not praised, defended and attack the people who complain. It's that last part I especially despise. If you like being kicked in the face then fine. Go ahead and let companies mistreat you if you want. But don't come here and tell others who won't put up with such poor behavior that they are just little bitches who should shut up.