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.)

[cynwoody]

MS has made a deal with chip makers whereby chips will not function with anything other than a MS product.

That will be news to Apple.

[GingisK]

OK. I’ll lock. I won’t unload. ;-D

[zeugma]

I personally don't blame them from a business perspective. Having to design, test and support new code & features for 3 different operating systems vs. just one will no question cost a lot more money and people resources.

... and yet somehow you can run Linux on anything from a home router to the largest supercomputers on the planet. I think crying poverty won't really go over well with most folks for a company like microsoft.