
Microsoft says new processors will only work with Windows 10 - nadezhda18
http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/16/10780876/microsoft-windows-support-policy-new-processors-skylake
======
userbinator
Does anyone else find the trend of accelerating forced obolescence very
unpleasant? With recent hardware only getting more locked-down and user-
hostile (often in the name of "security"), and hardware from the last few
years being more than sufficient for most uses, I can see the impetus to
upgrade has decreased significantly. Windows XP was supported by MS for a
_long_ time, and even after that, is still in quite widespread use today. I
suspect 7 will last even longer, as it's effectively the last version of
Windows that is still relatively featureful and not a "service".

A lot of users don't care about "latest and greatest" \--- they just want to
keep doing what they were, with what they have. Lack of support from MS
doesn't matter, as the community will form its own to provide unofficial fixes
for various things that don't work (and a lot of other things will keep
working.) Windows _9x_ , many years unsupported by MS, still has quite a
lively community:

[http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/8-windows-9x-me/](http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/8-windows-9x-me/)

[http://kernelex.sourceforge.net/](http://kernelex.sourceforge.net/)

(There are also surprisingly many videos on YouTube of new hardware running
old software.)

XP too:

[http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-
xp/](http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/)

~~~
cptskippy
Offering 5 years of support seems to be the new standard and has been largely
the trend outside of Microsoft for the last 10-15 years with the Linux Kernel
being one of the few exceptions. Distros like Ubuntu have LTS versions that
are supported for 5 years or less. Apple updates OSX annually and only
supports back 5 versions or less. Windows XP is almost 15 years old and it was
a burden for Microsoft to support it.

Support for legacy software doesn't include back porting of new features or
taking advantage of new hardware. So having a large % of users on legacy
systems will effectively hold back the industry.

Microsoft is trying to avoid this by putting more realistic support terms in
place. They aren't saying legacy software won't run on new systems, just that
they won't support it.

~~~
rz2k
Current OS X runs on Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros from 2007. For a five year old
2011 model, the only likely disadvantages are a lack of Retina display, and
probably the lack of an SSD unless upgraded.

I'm pretty sure Apple hasn't make any computers obsolete since the release of
10.8 in 2013, when they stopped support for many earlier GPUs. If you were
using Ubuntu or Mint on a Core 2 Duo you would have careful choice between
Gnome, Cinnamon, MATE, too because of the graphics. I'm also pretty sure that
10.7 is still getting security updates, which would make it like 2012 LTS.

~~~
cptskippy
I've spoken about Apple's support model before, it's pretty straight forward.
They only support something as long as it suits their interests.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10074484](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10074484)

------
andrewguenther
This is click bait. Old versions of Windows will work just fine, they simply
just won't be optimized for the new architecture features.

Enterprise customers are the ones who will be affected the most. It sounds
like Microsoft is saying that they won't provide support for issues if you're
running an old architecture. Regular users really won't be affected by this at
all.

------
pmontra
I'm no expert if CPU internals (only the general architecture) and I'm
puzzled. Maybe somebody can help to understand this issue.

Assuming that the instruction set is backward compatible as always has been,
how's possible that an older Windows doesn't work with those new CPUs? Timing
issues, assumptions on behaviors of the CPU that won't be true anymore, other?

Other popular OSes running on those CPUs (OSX, Linux) will stop running
properly and need a special build or CPU detection and per CPU paths?

~~~
mrpippy
I believe the problem isn't the CPU itself, but drivers for the rest of the
platform. Windows 7 doesn't have support for USB 3, I2C, secure boot, I2S
audio, and lots of other new technologies. Keeping drivers and BIOS maintained
(for what is likely a small number of users) is the problem.

~~~
userbinator
The OS doesn't come with drivers for everything but that doesn't mean others
won't write drivers either.

~~~
cptskippy
That's correct however in the past Microsoft has taken upon themselves to
write Bluetooth, USB, and other drivers because what was out there was crap.
They're not going to do this for new hardware, they're just going to say
"that's unsupported please upgrade or contact your OEM for the necessary
drivers."

------
meesterdude
Nothing will make me go to windows 10. I wholeheartedly disagree with the
business model behind it, and the only reason I'm on windows is for games; but
linux has a lot on it now, so the reasoning is going away. I paid for a
windows 7 license, i'm going to ride it for as long as I can, which will be at
least a few years. After that, I'll jump to linux for gaming, and by then the
state of gaming on Linux will have gotten even better.

------
shmerl
Hopefully it will drive more people to use Linux which doesn't have such
ridiculous problems.

~~~
mrpippy
I think of this like sticking with RHEL 5 (still supported/updated but barely)
and expecting to have full support for modern hardware--don't count on it, and
don't expect it to work forever.

~~~
shmerl
Not forever, but long enough. RHEL in general has quite a long period until
they EOL it.

------
cptskippy
The title is misleading, they aren't saying new processors won't work. They're
saying that they'll only support them in Windows 10.

------
paulddraper
"New processors will only work with Windows 10"

WTF?! They're using some sort of hardware DRM lockdown to kill Linux, FreeBSD,
etc? The nerve!

Oh wait, that's not what it said. It said windows 7/8 wouldn't be supported.
Stupid link bait title.

~~~
ocean3
How is link bait when it never mentions Linux? It seems like hardware lockdown
of windows versions.

~~~
iofj
It's actually just the reverse of what the title makes you think.

1) Windows 7&8 will work on new processors, just like windows XP and 1.0 will.
They just won't be updated to use, say, a new instruction set.

2) Windows 10 will in fact get these updates.

3) This won't apply to enterprise customers for 18 months

The article does NOT say:

That future intel processors will only run windows, or only windows 10, or
anything remotely of that nature. This is microsoft doing something, not intel
and/or AMD.

------
yuhong
From the blog article: "After July 2017, the most critical Windows 7 and
Windows 8.1 security updates will be addressed for these [Skylake]
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."
I think this only refers to driver updates and the like, right?

------
lutusp
I doubt the headline literally means what it implies, but if it were true, it
would be Microsoft's perfect answer to Linux and Android.

~~~
dTal
Except Microsoft don't make processors, or have the clout to tell Intel what
to do, so how the heck would they swing that? Might as well speculate on "if
Microsoft made Linux illegal".

They've already made installing Linux as inconvenient as they can arrange
without attracting another anti-trust suit, through the use of "Secure Boot".

------
gremlinsinc
more reason to switch to lubuntu, ubuntu, et al. Oh, good thing I already have
:)

