Comments Locked

125 Comments

Back to Article

  • eddman - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Bad title. It gives the impression that if you have older processors, you won't be able to continue using windows 10, which isn't the case.

    It should read "Microsoft To Support New(er) Processors Only On Windows 10".
  • tamalero - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Agree with you, I was starting to rage.. then read the article..
    Felt like a clickbait article.

    Also, is dailytech dead? it hasnt updated in months.
  • GTVic - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Renamed to YearlyTech. Wikipedia has a note on the inactivity. I think the editor wants to see how much ad-click income he can get with no effort.
  • ImSpartacus - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Lol, do you think it covers the cost of hosting?
  • Murloc - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    well if they fired all editors they don't have many expenses do they?
  • Murloc - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    I guess Mick was tired of writing clickbait.
  • ImSpartacus - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Never. That was his reason for existence.
  • magreen - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Ugh. I despised his writing. He was the single reason I stopped ever reading DailyTech.
  • Mr Perfect - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Single reason? But there where so many! ;) The toxicity of the comments pushed me away from that site, though I probably stuck with it too long and picked up bad habits.
  • ciparis - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Dailytech was an absurdly poorly-written mound of sensationalist techno-drivel. It never belonged on Anandtech.
  • Reflex - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    I would argue it was even worse when Michael Asher was writing. He made a lot of bullshit sound plausible enough to get referenced by other sites.
  • Yojimbo - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Yeah the title should definitely be changed.
  • Brett Howse - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Sorry you are correct the title is vague. I'll fix it up.
  • GTVic - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    "Microsoft to Stop Adding New Processor Features to Older Versions of Windows."
  • zodiacfml - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    I was about to post something similar to this. What kind of support are they talking about, which seems to be support for new CPU features in older versions of Windows.
  • micksh - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Alarmist title. Clickbait. Microsoft doesn’t need to support new CPU’s on old OS’es. CPU vendors maintain full backward compatibility with older OS’es, so users don’t have to worry.

    What Microsoft is saying is that if Intel invents AVX-1024, or something like that, it won't be supported in OS earlier that Win10. And it's OK because if older OS is used because of legacy software, that software won't support it either.

    OSX and Linux most likely will not add support for this kind of stuff to their 3-year old OS versions either. Otherwise, all old Windows versions run just fine on latest CPUs.

    Our company sometimes ships new PCs with Broadwell-E and Windows XP because they have to work with long time obsolete Firewire cameras that have no drivers for anything later than XP. It’s a job of hardware makers to develop drivers. Microsoft doesn’t develop 3rd party drivers.

    Windows XP, with last mainstream update in 2009, still works fine with year 2014 CPU, and I’m sure it will work with many next CPU generations too, so will Windows 7.
  • Alexvrb - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    You think this is bad, you should see how it's going over at some other tech sites. There's even a bunch of posters going apesh- like it's the end of the world, when the reality is that this is a NON-ISSUE. Skylake on Win7 already is missing speedshift support and that's fine. Want the latest features? Use the latest OS.
  • Tams80 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    The author could do well to remember that in English the first part of a sentence is often interpreted as the most important. Using 'except' is either bad writing, or clickbait.
  • addversaarry - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    It doesn't read like that at all, where did you learn how to read? Close that school.
  • Kjella - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Not surprised, Microsoft has completely lost it with Windows 10. It's nagware, FUD and forced obsolescence all the way because people aren't adopting it and they're getting more and more like a crack dealer trying to give you the first shot "free" every day. With the total disrespect they show for people who do not want to upgrade, how will it be like when they have you over a barrel?
    .
    On Windows 10 there's no choice, they can do what they want and there's no opting out, no turning it updates unless you block it at an external firewall and then you lose all security patches. Right now they're making Apple and Google look like the good guys, it's like Microsoft is trying to prove they can spy on and lock in their customers just as good as the competition. Two letters: F and U.
  • GTVic - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Did you copy and paste this from the last Windows 10 article you commented on? This news is "bad" for Windows 8.1 and earlier only.
  • looncraz - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Which is the majority of PC users...

    I, for one, don't like any version of Windows after 7.
  • Notmyusualid - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    And I Sir, agree with you.
  • jasonelmore - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    I wouldn't say Majority.

    The Latest Steam Hardware Survey is out and Windows 10 and Windows 7 have the same usage rate, except Windows 10 is gaining 2% per month. There are roughly 10% using 8.1..

    I would say within 6 months, windows 10 adoption will be more than windows 7 and windows 8.1 combined.
  • looncraz - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    You do know the definition of majority, right? Steam isn't all-inclusive, either. Most people don't use steam at all and aren't included in the survey.

    Netmarketshare.com has a wonderful breakdown as of November 2015. Windows 10 is just under 10% of the market. Windows 7, alone, is just over 55% of the market.
  • Alexvrb - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    I think if you narrow it down to systems running modern processors, it doesn't favor Win7 nearly so much. What OS all the billions of old clunkers run really doesn't have much relevance when talking about support for upcoming processors.
  • kaidenshi - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    One reason for Windows 10's growth among Steam users is native DX12 support. Granted, very few games right now utilize this, but gamers tend to be early adopters too. It's a skewed metric at best.
  • slickr - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Steam has 160 million users, most of which are duplicates. I have 3 steam accounts, if your average user has 2 accounts on steam, that literally cuts their users base to 80 million. They also count ALL oft he steam accounts, so even accounts created say 8 years ago and never used after are still counted.

    Even so windows 10 is not particularly popular even among steam gamers. Overall win10 is not very popular at all and with all the spying and stuff I think it will be the last MS OS system that people adopt. I think once Linux OS start using DX12 equivalent with openGL or whatever and we get better performance we will see people start using Linux.
  • twtech - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    It's not perf though that's been keeping people away from Linux as-is. Linux is still complex and unfamiliar.

    Want to see more adoption of Linux? Make it behave more like Windows.

    Don't want to do that? Then forget about the idea of it ever seeing mass-market adoption.
  • Alexvrb - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    Why would you want multiple steam accounts, again?
  • inighthawki - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    I can see three reasons on my own (he may be thinking of others as well):

    1) Some people create extra accounts to farm in certain games. I had a friend who created multiple accounts so he could idle in TF2 to get free items. I'm guessing other games may have similar concepts (limited number/rate of rewards while playing)

    2) Some people, especially those who play very seldomly, might forget their account details and find it easier to just create a new account if they owned few or no games on the previous account. I know two people who have done this.

    3) People may create fake/alt accounts to either get around bans or stats in a game. Getting banned in a free to play game means just making a new account. I've also seen some really good players who have high ratings in games like dota who create new accounts to fake their statistics (make themselves look really bad) to get placed in lower tier skill brackets and do pub stomps.

    I'm not sure how much all of those accounts make up though. Almost everyone I know has only a single account, but the people who do this tend to have many.
  • Alexvrb - Wednesday, January 20, 2016 - link

    Those are all terrible reasons and 1) and 3) are probably against their TOS on top of being just incredibly lame. 2) is terrible because you're throwing away whatever you DID own, plus it's really not hard to recover your account if it was ever really yours. Unless you really suck at "teh interwebs". Regardless, I would disagree that the average user has 2 accounts.
  • masouth - Thursday, January 21, 2016 - link

    While I would agree that 1 & 3 are typically lame and may violate TOS, the question asked wasn't one of ethics or morality but of why people create alternate accounts. All 3 of those are very real reasons that it happens no matter how lame, terrible, or unbelievable that you may find it to be.

    Your reasoning for for 2 being terrible is a bit specious. He already explained " if they owned few or no games" and that he knows people that have done that. I also know people as well. They only had free or super cheap games, lost access to the email, and just didn't care enough with the bother of trying to actually reach someone at a phone support line without running into hold, communication, or lack of ability to resolve it issues. It was just easier to create a new account and no big loss. Please don't equate being a Steam user to being a hardcore gamer, having a massive game library, owning "expensive" games, having good financial sense, or that Steam even requires ownership of a single game to have an account. There are quite a few casual gamers on Steam (numbers wise, not necessarily percentage of membership wise)

    All that said, I would also disagree that the average user has 2 accounts. While I have seen all 3 of those reasons they are hardly the majority or average.
  • Notmyusualid - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    I actually think this hardware obselesence was quite a clever idea from Micro$oft... though I do not support it whatsoever.

    I can imagine the meetings of the 'what and whys', when they struggled to get people off of XP, in how to best secure their continued future income on new OS licenses.

    They are throwing the customer 'under the bus' so as to get everyone running their 'Store'. That is really what is going on here.

    But regardless, you'll have to pry my Win 7 from my cold dead hands.

    And I care not a jot, what anyone thinks of that.

    I've advised all my clients to avoid the spyware, that is known as Windows 10. Once you explain the keylogger to them, or the uploading of their private 'contacts' to Redmond, they are both shocked and fully in agreement.

    Having said that - the Win 8.1 Pro that shipped with my machine (that I've never used - I own a Retail Win 7 Pro), will be installed and upgraded to Win 10 before the free upgrade year is up - ONLY so the machine will have a valid Win 10 license when I sell it on (yes the masses are stupid).

    My Win 7, (should it still work) will follow me to my next machine... and if not, well its hard to say, but increasingly there are other 'options', but not without caveats I must add.
  • Murloc - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    you can always use linux and keep windows installed as a secondary OS in order to run those programs.

    Honestly I don't quite get if the older OSes will just not support the new CPU features, or if they won't work at all on new machines.
  • haukionkannel - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Only new features. The new processors will work just fine, you only lose new features, just like wi did lose DX12, if not using win10. So there is nothing to worry about!
  • HollyDOL - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Not being advocate for Microsoft, but check out other providers for services you use every day. Sometimes you'll be suprised what you signed for.
  • Alexvrb - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    WHAT keylogger? Uploading contacts to Redmond? You mean like how almost every modern OS backs up contacts and whatnot to the cloud?? You're just another one spreading FUD. Next you'll be telling us that you're a leet h4xor security researcher and you provedz0red it with your script kiddie tools that don't actually show anything.
  • BrokenCrayons - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    This is one thing that hasn't been, as far as I know, a capability included in the final builds of Windows 10. It's an implied feature of the Windows 10 tech previews that people that participate in the Insider program are potentially asked to deal with while being voluntary testers. Here's a link to a Register article that articulates that fact:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/07/windows_10...

    Scroll down in there and you'll see where the author quotes the line from Microsoft about collecting individual characters collected.

    Once again, I don't know if this applies to non-tech preview versions of Windows 10.
  • Alexvrb - Wednesday, January 20, 2016 - link

    If there was a shade of truth to this oft-repeated HORSEPOO then all the REAL security researchers who are both legit and competent would be all over it. To put it mildly it's complete BULL and anyone that spreads this is either a troll or a disgusting tool.
  • HollyDOL - Thursday, January 21, 2016 - link

    Similar hoaxes spread with every new release of Windows as far as I can remember. Actualy I won a bet about Win10 one against my friend :-).

    The one I fell for was the XP-SP2 one with "SP2 can't play video files" and I was delaying upgrade due to that until I have seen on different computer what a nonsense it is. Ever since then I cba about anything like that unless it's published by respected security research web as a true vulnerability.
  • Svend Tveskæg - Wednesday, January 20, 2016 - link

    Then we are at least two. :-)
  • Murloc - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    it's a private company and they're doing what is useful to get everybody on board with their new way of doing things and to kill piracy.
    If someone doesn't like it he can always use linux.
  • Gadgety - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    @Kjella. I totally agree, the nagware is abusive.
  • damianrobertjones - Thursday, January 21, 2016 - link

    ZzzzZzzzzzzzzzz... . I hope you don't have a Facebook account or any Social media account.
  • User.Name - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    I guess I'm switching to OS X or Linux when I build a Kaby Lake system later this year, since Microsoft refuse to implement proper privacy controls on Windows 10 - or even issue a clear statement on exactly what data they are collecting on users.
    And the lack of control over what updates/drivers are downloaded from Windows Update is a problem as well. I've had too many problems with bad drivers being pulled down from Windows Update on 8.1 to leave it in control of the OS.

    I can understand these restrictions being in the Home edition of Windows 10 - even though I'm still not too happy about it - but full control over this should be enabled on the Professional edition. It should not be limited to Enterprise copies of the OS.
  • cbf - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    You do realize that neither OS/X nor most Linux distributions release updates that let their releases from seven years ago support new hardware, right?

    As for the privacy issues: http://www.zdnet.com/article/revealed-the-crucial-...
  • Articuno - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    A) Collecting data on what I do with my computer isn't okay just because it's (supposedly) anonymized.

    B) If it was truly harmless you could turn it off entirely, but you can't. Only Enterprise editions can fully disable data mining.
  • 10101010 - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    As I commented below, it is not even fully possible with Windows 10 Enterprise to disable data mining. Microsoft's new business model for Windows is selling people, not selling product.
  • LordanSS - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Yeah.... the reason why I'm still sporting Win7 is because I am not in favor of M$'s practices regarding data mining and my personal privacy.

    I wonder how come companies actually put up with this.
  • Alexvrb - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    So you use what, a Blackberry from a decade ago? If you use a modern smartphone... guess you put up with data mining like everyone else then.
  • User.Name - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    It is reasonable that they would only want to support new hardware on Windows 10.
    The issues that I have with that, are that Windows 8.1 was supposed to be supported until 2018, and there is no way that I'll be installing Windows 10 on any of my machines until they provide comprehensive controls over data collection, and restore control over what drivers and updates are installed on the system.

    It should concern everyone that Microsoft refuses to get specific about what data they collect.
    If it's so harmless, there's no reason for them to hide what they're doing, or provide discrete controls for people to decide what information they are comfortable sending Microsoft. The majority will be leaving those controls at the default setting anyway.
    The article that you linked to seems to be nothing more than the typical "well everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't Microsoft?" argument - which makes the assumption that everyone is using services like Facebook and always browses the web logged into a Google account, and doesn't see why having data collection built into the OS has the potential to be far more sinister than a web service you don't have to use.
  • haukionkannel - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    You know that win 7 and win8 also collect data... Win10 only did that move first and it has been updated to older oss too.
    Also for example Android collect data iOs collect data and so on... You have to go dos 5.0 and maybe be safe.
  • Notmyusualid - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    This reminds me of discussing with a Muslim the continued violence from Islam all over the world.... 'Well the Christians were once violent too!'.

    Well yes, but like mommy told you as a young boy, 'just because someone else did it, doesn't make it right for you to do it either.'

    Now off to your room!
  • Reflex - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    The Christians are still wildly violent. Both in the USA and outside of it. Its hardly a Muslim issue. Its a extremist issue.
  • name99 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    What you say ("neither OS/X nor most Linux distributions release updates that let their releases from seven years ago support new hardware, right") is absolutely true. But Apple has been this way since the dawn of time. Every Mac you ever buy since I expect at least the mid-80s comes with the latest version of the OS and no ability to run earlier versions. (You MIGHT [possibly] now have that ability on a virtual machine, but Apple doesn't claim that you do, or care whether it works, especially since they also don't ship the virtual machine software.)

    Since they've never promised this feature, no-one has ever expected, or ever cried that it wasn't available.
    The real problem here, it seems, is that if you offer features, people expect those features for ever as part of the package deal they are buying (same way when you buy an iPhone, you expect to get iOS updates for maybe five years or more, even though Apple never promised that). If a company plans to break this sort of implicit contract, they REALLY ought to lay the groundwork first, to soften people up. Just announcing a change, with no earlier preparation, is asking for trouble.
    What MS should have done is to announce this sort of thing at a dev conference in 2013 or so ("BTW, we are planning to make this change with Win 10 in 2016 --- adjust your buying plans accordingly, and let us know any comments" [even if the comments are going to be ignored, at least listen --- every so often, in the stream of idiocy, there will be one really bright idea worth noting]).
  • haukionkannel - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    win7 and win8 will work fine with processors made in 2020... You only miss new features that are not invented yeat.
  • NetMage - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    I think that is an overly optimistic position - there are Windows 10 notebooks today that have poor Windows 7 support and others that claim Windows 7 support but aren't actually able to run it with stability. It would not be surprising if future services that aren't going to be supported by Microsoft also won't be tested by the vendors of even have drivers provided. Especially problematic are features involving sleep, hibernation and power savings.
  • BrokenCrayons - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Ed Bott, the author of that article, is well known for his heavy bias in favour of Microsoft products. A healthy chunk of his personal income originates from sales of books that help people understand Microsoft's newest products and their sales are highest when new products are released so he has to help drive the market in order to enjoy a monetary reward. In addition to that fairly obvious conflict of interest, he's also been at the centre of a controversy where he was accused of accepting bribes from Microsoft that came to light in 2008. Here's a link:

    http://techrights.org/2008/11/09/ed-bott-laptop-br...

    I'm genuinely surprised that after twenty plus years of slanted journalism that he's still got people buying into his rants as honest or genuinely representative of reality. It'll be a good day for technical journalism (and a bad one for Microsoft as he's the most skillful shill they keep in their back pocket) when he retires.

    To address Ed's claims directly though, he and Microsoft have already admitted that they collect telemetry on all Windows 10 machines and have retroactively incorporated some of that telemetry into Windows 7 and 8.x through various updates. While he claims that there's a distinction between spying and analytical collection, the bottom line that doesn't escape his heavy spin doctoring is that the data collection is indeed happening AND that there's no specific published listing of what each privacy slider setting does or doesn't enable Microsoft to collect. Nor do they list what's included in "basic telemetry that's collected for the improvement of the operating system" when all sliders are turned off. Things that improve the OS could be virtually anything if you're able to warp the language in your own mind. Regardless of whether or not a personal identity is included with the data, it's a bit alarming that Microsoft can and does reach into the system to monitor how many minutes you spend in a particular browser, how long you spend in a program, and what photos you're viewing or what the system's microphone picks up by being active (using Cortana voice interaction as an excuse to leave an open mic up). Furthermore, Microsoft doesn't explain what's in those 40MB encrypted packages that Win10 regularly pushes upstream back to their servers.

    Frankly, I find the whole thing creepy and makes Microsoft's products no longer a safe haven away from Google, Apple, Facebook, or any other company. It's disappointing that they've gone to that level of invasiveness and fear-mongering to drive sales for their bloody on-OS streetside software flea market.

    As for me, I'm happily using Linux, but I fear the day UEFI BIOSes are locked down with cert-based security (as an off switch for Secure BIOS is no longer required by Microsoft with the release of Win10 where it was before with 8.1 and below) and a lack of granting a cert for non-MS bootloaders like GRUB will lock Linux out of quite a lot of hardware. If that ever happens, I'm personally planning to move to Android devices. I've already got a rooted burner phone and bluetooth keyboard+touchpad that are good enough to be my only computing platform and I rather like minimalistic computing anyway so it'd not be a big leap to scoop up a droid tablet and abandon x86 computing altogether. If I'm going to be spied on, I'd prefer it be Google doing it instead of Microsoft...eh, pick your poison I suppose.

    TL;DR - Ed Bott's a biased, bought and paid for MS mouthpiece trying to spin a bad thing into something good.
  • Reflex - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!
  • slickr - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Please do not post articles from the WELL KNOWN MS shill Ed Bott. That guy would literally murder his family if it meant more positive MS coverage.
  • 10101010 - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    It doesn't matter what version of Windows 10 you run. Even the Enterprise edition is riddled with spyware that steals your data and uploads it to Microsoft.

    https://www.ntlite.com/discussions/#/discussion/42...

    Moving to a Linux or BSD distribution seems to be getting more and more common. I see a lot more Linux laptops now than a year or two ago.
  • Reflex - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Quickly warn everyone on your G+ and Facebook accounts about Microsoft's privacy violations!
  • Arnulf - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    I don't have a Facebook or G+ account.
  • inighthawki - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    I hope you're running only fully open source software that you've manually verified for no telemetry, then. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but almost every piece of modern software, and even most dating back for at least about 10 years or so, collects telemetry data on how the software is being used. This includes all modern versions of Windows, OSX, iOS, Android, and most third party software and video games too.
  • Reflex - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    In my current position I work extensively on Android and iOS. Telemetry data is industry standard at this point, both at the OS and app level. Even some Linux distros do it to a limited extent. If anything, MS is leading by actually disclosing what they are doing, at least better than others. Good luck getting Google to tell you everything they are gathering from your phone, or what its being used for.
  • Michael Bay - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Tired childish standby of IMMA SWITCH TO LOONIX DIS TIEM FO SHO always dies after first contact with said loonix.
  • WhisperingEye - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    Lol. True. I couldn't even get Java installed in Linux Mint, following online instructions. Probably because the version it was talking about, and the version I had installed had completely different 'rules'.
  • BrokenCrayons - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    My first contact with Linux was Mandrake in 1999. I moved to Slackware in 2001 and I presently prefer using Mint. Linux has been my primary OS for a long time. I still have a Windows system at my disposal, but it's generally relegated to secondary roles and goes months without being turned on. It was NOT a fun or easy transition to make and in the late 90's the Linux community was pretty unhelpful. RTFM-style responses in various Linus communities were distressingly commonplace.

    The good news is that things have changed for the better. A modern distro like Ubuntu or Mint can get a user with no experience access to basic computing capabilities in a matter of minutes. Installation which used to be quite a pain is a lot easier thanks to the collapse of the industry into a few hardware manufacturers on predictable release cycles that generally release Linux drivers for their products. And most importantly, the Linux community has toned down it's rhetoric, elitism, and toxic attitude as an influx of new users have brought it a lot of new attention as a viable alternative. If I were switching over now to a major distro, things would be a lot easier. Yes, there's still some learning to do, but I'd say about as much as one would have moving from 7 to 10. There are still a few limitations as well, but even the last bastion of Windows, gaming, isn't such a problem these days. Steam has many thousands of titles that run under Linux (around the middle of last year when I last checked numbers, there were 2,700 some games that ran natively under Linux there) and that number was on the rising portion of a curve so I'd imagine the number is larger now. Other functionality is pretty much spot on except that GIMP is a terrible image editing suite that's positively a nightmare to learn.
  • cygnus1 - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    I think I'm fine with this. It just means they're not writing updates for the older OS HAL as new hardware comes out. I think if anybody should be mad, it should be Intel. You're going to see a lot of companies buying less and less current gen hardware if the their internally standardized OS (Win7) won't run on it.

    This could also bite MS in the ass in another way, I think it makes it easier for companies to consider other OS's. If they know they have to switch OS when buying new hardware, why not try out other non-Windows OS's...
  • Murloc - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    non-tech employees have issues adapting, but they're forced to adaptation when they buy new computers for the home, so they're already adapted to the new version of windows.

    So the incentive for the company to keep using windows is there.
  • YukaKun - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Unfortunately, MS has a big chunk of the Enterprise world grabbed by the balls with the MS Office ecosystem. They have tied MS Office to a LOT of basic operational functionality in big Corporations. I could give you a few terrifying examples of that, but MS makes the deal sweet. I don't know if those Corps would have a big say on how MS changes their OS policies in regards to the Enterprise world, but the consumers are screwed big time.

    Cheers!
  • osxandwindows - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Fuckyou, microsoft.
    You are forcing everyone to upgrade no matter what.
    Not providing support for new hardware for older versions of windows shows just how much customer friendly you really are.
    Does anyone see what happens when we have a monopoly?
    Microsoft knows.
  • Murloc - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    there is no monopoly, you can buy a mac or install linux if you prefer. The market will decide if this is THAT bad or not.
  • RBFL - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    If the Intel processors still support the same features as the older processors, won't the OS run?
  • jimbo2779 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Yes, absolutely fine as they always have in the past.

    The thing they are saying here, that some are unable to see, is that new CPU features (new SSE, new encryption standards or whatever, new sleep states) will not be supported at the OS level.

    The older OS versions will still work with the CPUs and provide the same features that they have always had and will still receive the same security updates as you would expect. Anyone getting particularly upset about this is not reading the article fully.
  • sorten - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    I can't imagine this will be an issue. I've never been at a company that updated CPUs in their computers and left it on an older OS. For that matter, I've never seen a company's IT department replace CPUs at all. If it's time to move to new hardware they order a bunch of new OEM boxes and take the tax benefit. Desktop machines in particular have been commodity items for more than a decade.
  • Deelron - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    I've seen plenty of places that buys new (not fancy or anything, but still recently released) hardware but runs the older OS that is installed on every other machine in the building(s).
  • haukionkannel - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    And old os will run fine with new CPU because the CPU is backward comp-ability. No worry here even to corporate.
  • NetMage - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    If the recent Skylake bug requires an OS installed patch or change to work around, will Microsoft release a Windows 7 update to fix it?
    When the next generation Intel CPU needs custom microcode patching for a bug work around, you will be out of luck with Windows 7 on your new PC.

    Enterprises don't like guessing on how well officially unsupported software will run.

    http://www.extremetech.com/computing/220953-skylak...
  • nagi603 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    There are plenty of cases of this. You could pick any custom software that is touchy in terms of OSes, like the dozens and dozens that still run on DOS and/or XP only. Most of the times a simple emulator won't even suffice for them. Or where the admins don't want to have to deal with re-testing a very complex software that might have this issue.
  • Beany2013 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    "I can't imagine this will be an issue. I've never been at a company that updated CPUs in their computers and left it on an older OS."

    As someone who installs new hardware for companies, anyone larger than a mom-and-pop outfit does this - schools, local government, most SMBs with more than 50 computers, enterprises.

    It's a tactic to ensure stability with the software ecosystem - and to prevent having to retrain staff every time Microsoft decide to rip and their existing UI and replace it with something totally different.

    As an example, a company I was working for recently was installing Windows 7 machines well into 2015 because the client operations couldn't afford the downtime of explaining how the Metro interface worked.

    In smaller outfits, it's less of an issue - you can just sit all ten staff members down and step them through the main changes. When you have 100 staff, that just isn't possible, and the downtime caused by it is more significant.
  • sorten - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Interesting. It's certainly not a company size issue in my case. Current company is 350+ and previous company was > 1000 employees. Guess I've been lucky working at tech companies. Every two to three years they just hand me a new laptop, and thankfully it's running the current OS.

    I do know companies paused between XP and Vista because of the new security model and so many apps were broken, but I didn't realize IT departments were making this decision for the Win7, Win8 and Win10 upgrades.

    The training with the "metro" interface should have been minimal. It look about one minute to configure it to boot to desktop, and hopefully your employees are competent enough to launch apps from search rather than digging around in the start menu. That was a feature starting in Vista.
  • TheITS - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    The impression I get with Windows 10 is that Microsoft wanted to start with as clean of a slate as possible with a new platform to build from in the many years to come.
  • 10101010 - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    "The impression I get with Windows 10 is that Microsoft wanted to start with as much personal data as possible, so they have a potentially endless revenue stream from its sale in the many years to come."

    FTFY.
  • Notmyusualid - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Yep, that seems corrected.
  • SpartanJet - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    And idiotic people like you are generally using ADroid for their phones and allowing that AD company to rape your personal information daily. Its also funny because that AD company basically doesnt even support its OS. Tell me how many updates that AD company has pushed to your phone? None.
  • WhisperingEye - Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - link

    I have a Nexus 5x, at this point, 4, or more simply 1 per month since I've owned it.
  • Reflex - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    For those who are freaking out, here is a little info -

    - New CPU's will run older versions of Windows just fine. All the way back to Windows 3.1, actually.
    - What will change is that new features will not be supported by the OS. So if the next Intel CPU supports a new power management mode, instruction set, extension or other such modification, older versions of Windows will not be updated to support that feature.
    - Since Intel CPU's are and will remain x86, legacy software will continue to run on them into the indefinite future.
    - If Intel made such a major change that the OS had to be written to specifically support the CPU, it would not only be older Windows versions that were affected, but also Linux, BSD and numerous embedded operating systems (including some from Microsoft).

    So relax. This is just a statement of priorities. If you love Win7, you will still be able to use Win7, even in 2025 on hardware released in 2025.
  • osxandwindows - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Yes, but can I use chipset specific features like thunderbolt 3, on older versions of windows?
  • Reflex - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    Most likely yes, those are supported via the driver model, which has not changed. Furthermore, add-in cards for such things exist which means there are hardware developers who will write drivers for them.
  • micksh - Friday, January 15, 2016 - link

    "All the way back to Windows 3.1" - From Windows 1.0, actually.
    I don't understand the reason for panic. Older Windows versions run just fine on latest CPUs without OS updates. Intel and AMD maintain full backward compatibility. It's up to OEM's to release drivers for old OS'es.
    Here is a video of upgrading 2010 PC from Windows 1.0 (released in 1985, 25 years before PC was made) to Windows 8:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WP7AkJo3OE
  • Arnulf - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    "Intel and AMD maintain full backward compatibility."

    They do indeed. However chipset manufacturers may not care about supporting old (EoL) products on new OS. I have an Athlon X2 6000+ system that is running Windows7 just fine. I tried to install W10 Tech Preview (tried different builds) but the damn thing just kept BSODing halfway through installation process ... Motherboard is built around NForce (500 ?) chipset.

    So full compatibility from CPU vendors means very little when the hardware CPU is plugged into (the motherboard) isn't supported.
  • Phcompguy - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    That is.. literally.. the exact opposite issue to what this article is discussing.
  • MrSpadge - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    That chip is not supported since Win 8.1. It's a bug in the implementation of some security instruction, for which MS provided a software work-around, but stopped to do so in Win 8.1 onwards.
  • NetMage - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    So much for the theory that Microsoft not officially supporting or testing a CPU is a non-issue.
  • Reflex - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    Not sure what your point is. The chipset has a defect and Microsoft chose not to compromise security with a workaround. While technically it is true that they could have chosen to support it specifically, in this instance it made more sense not to. Cases like this will be an issue going forward, but they were also issues in the past as pointed out here. These types of issues will not crop up any more or less than they did prior to Microsoft announcing this policy change.
  • eddman - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Well, the hate squads always look for an opportunity, and this provides aplenty.

    They are acting as if older OSes not supporting certain new hardware features was never a thing before.
  • Gadgety - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    @eddman. "Hate squads" I used to be a big proponent of everything Microsoft, but the nagware for W10 and 45 minutes of pure lies from Microsoft's own over-the-phone tech support, only for them to say hold on, and after 10 minutes of silence disconnect the call made me change my mind. I thought Microsoft was supposed to be about productivity, not obstructing it. It should be illegal to force customers having to do something, whether it is buying the product or finding a solution to turn the nagging off. Their act is a certain form of violence, taking away control and forcing people to act in order not to buy, or give in and install Windows10. I'm quite sure this comes down to the management at Microsoft, and management bonuses dependent on Windows 10 conversion and uptake. My point is of course only a tangent to the piece at hand here, and you are right, Microsoft has created a hate squad. I wouldn't be surprised to see Myerson or Nadella in a situation similar to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S30WdoEHCH4.

    The money feels good
    And your life you like it well
    But surely your time will come
    As in heaven, as in hell
  • eddman - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    I don't care about MS; I just can't stand nonsensical, usually false hate comments on websites that add nothing to the information pool, be it about MS, apple or any other thing.

    I'd argue that the huge majority of hate squads have always been there. This is just another excuse to flame a bit more.

    I this case, MS are not forcing anyone to buy anything. Windows 7 and 8.1 will work on newer processors just fine.

    As for the nagging, I don't like it either, but there are ways to stop it, first and foremost by not installing/uninstalling and then hiding the update that is responsible. There is also a KB providing ways to block the whole thing.
  • Phcompguy - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    How... DARE you respond with logic, common sense and a base level understanding of the x86 architecture. The appropriate response in this instance is to forget the history of the last 25+ years of the x86 architecture and the fact that ancient operating systems still boot on modern hardware today, make outlandish claims about Microsoft forcing Enterprises to upgrade by not permitting old Windows versions booting on new hardware going forward, replace MS with M$ and Microsoft with Micro$oft so as to appear like you're 15 years old and living in your parents' basement and generally act like a total tool! (This comment thread was so silly, I felt the need to finally set up an account JUST to post this snarkey message, seriously people, get a grip).

    In all seriousness though, the author really could have done a better job making clear that this will only impact support for new CPU features, not the ability to boot old OS' on new hardware.
  • Reflex - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    It is not only here, I'm seeing this on several other top websites, like Ars Technica. I don't know why nobody is applying critical thinking skills, or simply asking for clarification from Microsoft. I worked there for 11 years, almost entirely on Windows. This is not an actual change in policy, it was fairly uncommon for new CPU features to be backported once a new OS had been launched. All MS is doing is making explicit what was historically assumed.
  • MrSpadge - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Yeah, that's what "end of mainstream support for Win 7" means. Afterwards MS will provide security updates but not implement new functionality, i.e. explicitly program support for new CPU features.
  • takeship - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    It's a little different than that though, as mainstream support for 8.1 was suppose to last through early 2018, and now 2015/2016 CPU features won't make that cut. Even if 7 & 8.1 will "work" on AMD and intrl chips, MS has announced that feature complete support is bring cut 2+ years short.
  • Reflex - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Honestly that has always been the case though. DirectX, for instance, was not always backported to older versions of the OS, even when they were in mainstream support. As a result, while newer video cards would work fine on older versions of Windows, you would not gain access to newer features that required the new version of DirectX. This is substantially the same situation.
  • eddman - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Replacing MS with M$ is one of the most childish and moronic things I've ever come across. To think that they go into the trouble of holding the shift key to type a $ sign.
  • maximumGPU - Thursday, January 21, 2016 - link

    couldn't agree more!
  • Gadgety - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    @Reflex. Thank you for clarifying.
  • NetMage - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    That is demonstratably not true even today.
  • Pork@III - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Microsoft - blackmailer!
  • Phcompguy - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    This has no meaningful impact on anyone, anywhere. Windows 7 will continue to boot fine on new CPU's. Feel free to go take your meds at any point here.
  • cjb110 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    I don't expect anything <10 to make full use of latest or new chips, but I would expect it to work and I've no doubt it will. As I doubt either Intel or AMD will dramatically change the architecture of a pc, and Windows 7 machine will work on their new chips too.
  • r3loaded - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Good. I don't want 7 to become the new XP.
  • FunBunny2 - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    remember the days of WinTel monopoly? days of yore when Windoze would only work if it ran on the newest X86 chip? the symbiosis: M$ wrote cycle sucking software in order to justify Intel's evermore cycle producing chips. now that 99.44% of software (M$ or otherwise) was "good enough" on a decade or more old cpu, this is just an attempt to get back to that, but de jure, not just de facto.
  • Reflex - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Comments like these are silly and historically ignorant. In the 90's Microsoft was tasked with writing an operating system that could handle an ever increasing amount of user scenarios, such as internet access, or true multi-tasking. Meanwhile the hardware target had the computing power equivalent of a fraction of the cell phone you keep in your pocket. It was not until about 2006 that the CPU became 'good enough' for continued changes in use cases, which was in no small part prompted by the fact that new user cases now tend to displace older use cases rather than be simply added to what you already do.

    Things have changed. If a brand new category of use is found for PC's that requires significant CPU cycles and runs concurrently with existing utilization of the PC, then you will once again have a race to create faster CPU's and a race for the operating systems and applications to accommodate it.
  • smartthanyou - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    The idea that companies won't get Windows 10 support on new hardware is incorrect. They won't get Windows 10 support on the latest hardware...there is a difference. Companies will still be able to buy new computers however those computers will have to be a generation or two back hardware-wise.

    I would say in most cases, that isn't a big problem.
  • eddman - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    You got it backwards. Windows 10 will be supported, regardless of the underlying hardware, as long as they meet the minimum requirements, which are quite low already.

    It's windows 7 and 8.1 that will not be able to support all the new hardware features, like new instructions, etc. in the upcoming CPU models. Nevertheless, they will still run fine, full support or not.
  • pivejasey - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    It just means that Windows 10 will be the same someday.

    It's a trap!
  • speculatrix - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    It's about time Microsoft abandoned 32 bit platforms, and refuse to install with less than 4GB RAM, and 32G of storage... We're not in the early 2010's any more.
  • Murloc - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    that's stupid, if it still works on old computers why force them into the trash, or worse force them to keep using outdated OSes?
    It'd be bad for people and environment and it'd be bad for MS.
  • zero2dash - Saturday, January 16, 2016 - link

    Somehow I think I'll be fine with my 4790K and Win7.
    If I want to build a computer, I'll just buy old tech used anyway.
    Low move but doesn't really matter to me either way.
  • Danvelopment - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    Seeing as Microsoft has made this announcement, and they're not currently a major player, I would guess that Microsoft is planning to extend the current driver platform on Windows Update to be all encompassing with newer drivers submitted to, tested, and approved by MS.

    If they do this, then there's two risks, risk one which is unlikely in the short term but possible in the long term, device manufacturers will stop supplying drivers to the general public and slipping drivers will become similar to Android (want a custom rom? Here's fourty steps and you have to steal drivers from another device).

    This will become particularly likely if MS does the second risk, they enforce much more restrictive driver installations, pretty much it almost MUST come from Windows Update and if it doesn't it throws a thousand warnings that you're risking security and asks you to accept the "Third Party Driver" terms and conditions.
  • Jerryg50 - Sunday, January 17, 2016 - link

    It is an added complication when the new processors and hardware will not be able to work with the older operating systems. Then again, it is of very high risk to work with OS's that are no longer supported, especially for the security issues.

    As for the OS's the code structures are changing and becoming more advanced. This is especially for hardware interfacing, networking, and graphics. As for the hardware design, and the firmware becomes more complex in the fact they have to now support more extensive operations to cover for both new and old code structure.

    As for how the new OS's are working, I am becoming more convinced to move to Linux. With Linux there are also issues for the vast support that MS can offer. I would think it would be best to go with a commercial supported distribution of Linux rather than a free one. This way there would be a more direct support base.
  • yhselp - Monday, January 18, 2016 - link

    Is there any way for Microsoft to forcefully prevent motherboard makers from supporting older Windows OSes? Is there a reason for them to comply? Is it possible for MS to stop updates to an old OS once it detects it's running on a new CPU?
  • Svend Tveskæg - Wednesday, January 20, 2016 - link

    You can be sure, that when MS is giving away a fully fledged OS for free, you´re the commodity.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now