Microsoft made 'em do it: The latest Kaby Lake, Zen chips will support only Windows 10

PC World ^ | Aug 30, 2016 | Mark Hachman

[upchuck]

Microsoft is slamming the door on PC builders and upgraders who might have hoped to use the new Intel Kaby Lake or AMD Zen chips for Windows 7 or Windows 8 PCs. Sorry: Both chips are officially supported only by Microsoft’s Windows 10.

Microsoft's mandate is discreet rather than secret. In January, the company tried to shorten its support lifecycle for Intel Skylake PCs running Windows 7 and 8, a policy the company subsequently abandoned after much outcry. But Microsoft’s statements have also consistently included a critical caveat: The latest generations of silicon—specifically Intel’s Kaby Lake chip, Qualcomm’s 8996, and AMD’s Bristol Ridge silicon—will all require Windows 10.

“As new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support,” a Microsoft spokeswoman replied, when asked to confirm that that position was still in place. The goal appears to be to move forward with new features, even if it means leaving some users behind. “This enables us to focus on deep integration between Windows and the silicon, while maintaining maximum reliability and compatibility with previous generations of platform and silicon.”

Why this matters: Microsoft's push forward, however rational from a technology standpoint, robs PC enthusiasts of their choice of operating systems—a freedom this particular sector of the community has loudly defended in the past. This could have broader implications for the PC market, too: It could be the deciding factor that finally brings about the abandonment of Windows 7 and Windows 8.1. (Linux is an option, too, and nothing is precluding Apple from buying the chips for Macs, either.)

[Wonder Warthog]

"The goal appears to be to move forward with new features, even if it means leaving some users behind.

This has been Apple's modus operandus since the first Mac. Ask all those Apple II owners who expected an Apple II compatible upgrade path.

".....and nothing is precluding Apple from buying the chips for Macs, either.

I thought current Mac machines already ran on Intel hardware.

[ClearCase_guy]

Linux has such a bright future. The best strategy for the Linux community is to push for more access to games. Like it or not, a good percentage of the PC world is driven by computer games and porn. Many games run on Linux these days. But not all. If it were a no-brainer, and every game ran on Linux, I think Windows would be left in the dust pretty quick, at least in the consumer market. And business benefits from Linux too. Microsoft really offers very little at this point.

[Conservative Gato]

So Microsoft is actively reducing their customer base?

That might just end up being the result. I know I don't use much Windows products anymore. People will have to remember from our indoctrinating liberal colleges come people who work for or run companies like Microsoft.

Liberals don't believe in the free market system so for them, and their control-freak attitudes, these things must be forced on us for our own good. Their crony lobbyists makes sure the corrupt politicians and the same attitude liberal government looks the other way.

I saw this mentality on a bunch of different corporations several years ago. As far as MS goes, I adjusted to using Linux as an operating system so I could get away from their tyrannical attitudes and haven't regretted it since.

CGato

[DoughtyOne]

If FReepers would join me by sending an additional 10% of what they have already donated this FReep-a-thon, we would end the FReep-a-thon today

How about it FReepers?  Do you have a few minutes to spare?


We're getting close folks.  Lets put this FReep-a-thon out of its misery.  ":^)



Free Republic, the Home of the Eternal FReeper, Conservatism's Finest  (timely thoughts on the FReeper dynamic and Free Republic)

Ramirez's latest political cartoon LARGE VERSION 09/02/2016: LINK  LINK to regular sized version of Ramirez's latest, and an archive of his political cartoons.  Read his thoughts on Colin Kaepernick sitting down, use right link.
In this political cartoon, Ramirez presents, "...Labor Day..."

Please join the monthlies, an automated way to help support Free Republic.

If you are not opting to join the automated monthly support program, please consider joining the One One Done project.  LINK

FReepers, 93.67% of the Third Quarter FReep-a-thon goal has been met.  Click above and pencil in your donation now.  Please folks, lets end this FReepathon.  Thank you!
...this is a general all-purpose message, and should not be seen as targeting any individual I am responding to...

[Gideon7]

There is no good reason to break backward compatibility at the hardware level. I checked the Microsoft link in the article and found nothing in the Microsoft announcement (https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/01/15/windows-10-embracing-silicon-innovation/#9hvKDeXAqGuI93h2.97) that says that that Win 7/8 won’t install on the new chips.

What Terry Myerson is claiming is that Microsoft won’t “support” Windows 7/8 on the newer chips, whatever that means.

Microsoft has already dropped Windows 7 support down to extended support (security fixes only). There is no reason to expect that Win 7 won’t run fine on the new chips, just don’t expect the new chip features to be used. Intel and AMD will publish .INF drivers to recognize the new CPUs (these ‘drivers’ do little more than report the chip name and version in Device Manager and other places).

Myerson is creating unnecessary FUD by being deliberating being vague about what ‘support’ means.

As a practical matter there is no way that Microsoft is going to break hardware compatibility like that, certainly not for old VMs if nothing else. Far too much legacy stuff depends on it.

This FUD announcement by Myerson is stupid. It has to be royally pissing off Intel and AMD because it will just kill a huge segment of the market for Intel/AMD’s new chips (basically the entire legacy market), which neither Intel nor AMD would ever willingly do.

[EasySt]

I’ve built my own PCs since they first came out.

I’ve helped people with PC and Windows problems professionally and privately for decades.

I’m done.

My friends and associates who still run Windows have constant problems and issues. Those who don’t, don’t.

I can hardly believe I’m mostly an Apple and Mac user these days, but it sure is nice to run on stuff that just works. I haven’t had that experience since exploring the limits of OS/2.

[Dalberg-Acton]

Windows 10 is the only Microsoft Windows OS to support these chips entire feature set. As I understand it, linux, BSD and Apple can still support these new chips.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Myerson is creating unnecessary FUD by being deliberating being vague about what ‘support’ means.

Exactly.

[Ray76]

> If MS does not want to modify their software to accommodate the new chips why should they be compelled to do so?

That’s not what is happening here. MS has made a deal with chip makers whereby chips will not function with anything other than a MS product.

[ronnietherocket3]

This is restrictive trade practice, which is illegal. It is time for the Feds to give Microsoft the 'ole IBM/AT&T treatment.

It may very well be that in order to support the CPU Microsoft has to do work. I do not believe that the FedGov can force Microsoft to provide an upgrade. In addition, neither Intel nor AMD are obligated to do work so someone else can sell a product.

[Ray76]

This is an opportunity for IBM/GlobalFoundries.

[DarthFuzball]

All very true.

I simply think there is enough questionable activity here to justify further investigation to make sure they have not crossed into illegal business practices. That’s all.

I agree with you on Linux. I am currently on my last Windows box. You might want to start making Linux Live USB sticks and playing with them to see which flavor of Linux you prefer.

[ronnietherocket3]

That’s not what is happening here. MS has made a deal with chip makers whereby chips will not function with anything other than a MS product.

This is not true; the only Windows product that will be supported is Win10. Linux and Apple products will work. It makes utterly no sense for Intel to adopt a strategy like this. It would help them nowhere and would piss off a large percentage of their users who write code that runs in Linux and needs the latest CPU features to run quickly. The only thing it would accomplish would be to push more HPC from CPU to GPU.

[ronnietherocket3]

I don’t see a problem with what windows is doing here. If they were writing software that prevented current OS installs from continuing to function that would be an issue (though I am surprised they have not done that). As for companies that write software to run on only one version of an OS, I have little sympathy for now. At this point any software company should realize that writing software to run on only one version of an OS is stupid. It departments should realize that technology always changes and should really stop this nonsense of trying to hold it back.

[catnipman]

Microsoft is determined to not only to destroy their own shrinking monopoly in the rapidly shrinking PC market, but to take down all of its partners with it.

Nonetheless, I don’t see what the big deal is. 99.999999999% of PC usage requires minimal CPU power anyway, and Intel still makes almost every CPU chip family since and including the Pentium.

[Gideon7]

‘Support’ has multiple meanings:

- The chip wont run Win 7/8.

- Microsoft wont help you fix your PC if it runs Win 7/8.

- Microsoft wont retrofit Win 7/8 with updates to support the new features on the chips.

Myerson is being coy by not explaining which sense of ‘support’ he is talking about. It is almost certainly #3 and partly #2 (Win 7 full support has already expired).

The PC Mag author is claiming it is #1.

[VanShuyten]

I finally caved and moved from Win 7 to 10, mostly because MS is abandoning security and other updates for Win 7. That means that the third-world hackers, where they still use Win 7, will be unchallenged.

It works fine now that I shut down all the new memory- and CPU-eating programs. There’s a surprising number of them, and many of them are to keep track of my usage, so that’s another reason to shut them down.

[upchuck]

It is my understanding that MSFT will continue to offer security updates through the defined end of Win 7 which is 2020, I think.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

[Ray76]

I wouldn’t be so sure.

If the chip is licensed to OEM’s who are contractually required to install only Windows on systems built around this chip then any systems built with the chip will only load Windows and there is nothing you can do about it. UEFI, Secure Boot, and Trusted Platform Module, together make it possible.

If the chip is licensed to OEM’s who are not contractually required to install only Windows on systems built with the chip, then other OSs can be installed

The capability exists, what is available depends on Microsoft’s & Intel’s licenses and contracts between themselves and system builders (HP, Dell, etc).

[MCH]

Another luddite thread, ZZZZZzzzzz. Commodore 64 forever!!