www. O S N E W S .com
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
Blocking Windows 7, 8.1 updates for Kaby Lake, Ryzen chips imminent
By Thom Holwerda on 2017-03-16 23:09:20

Ars Technica reports:

A recently published Knowledge Base article suggests that Microsoft is going to block Windows Updates for owners of the latest Intel and AMD processors if they try to run Windows 7 or 8.1.

Last year, Microsoft announced a shift in the way it would support Windows. Going forward, new processors, including Intel's Kaby Lake and AMD's recently-released Ryzen, would require the newest version of Windows. Users of Windows 7 and 8.1 would be out of luck, with Microsoft having no plans to support the new chips on the old operating systems.

Take note.

 Email a friend - Printer friendly - Related stories
.
Read Comments: 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-50 -- 51-51
.
RE: Blocking?
By BlueofRainbow on 2017-03-17 12:15:21
Notebooks based on the 6th Gen CPUs can be purchased with Windows 7 Pro installed through downgrade rights from Windows 10 Pro. However, I remember something about Windows 7/8.1 Updates which "don't work" on a 6th Gen or later system will not be fixed so that they do.

Notebooks based on the 7th Gen CPUs are coming to store without an option for Windows 7 Pro through downgrade rights.

So, soon, the only way for one to have a fully patched Win 7/8.1 system until its official end-of-support date will be to purchase a pre-owned one - if it was not previously updated to Windows 10!
Permalink - Score: 3
.
And yet again
By Drunkula on 2017-03-17 12:29:53
Microsoft is really showing its disdain for consumers (meaning not enterprise customers). I despise them more and more as time goes by.
Permalink - Score: 4
.
RE: Legality, Necessity
By stormcrow on 2017-03-17 12:32:50
Yeah, this is pretty much a non-issue for the average Joe as they don't upgrade anything unless it's an entirely new computer to begin with.

For small businesses, same thing, complete options via some business line from an OEM like Dell, and a contract with their specific business software provider for their business specific stuff, or all-in-one solution provider. It won't be a major problem.

For large enterprises and contracted services, this won't even be a blip on the radar. This is MS's bread and butter. These customers deploy set solutions that include a hardware package, OS, and software platform that are integrated together and have contracts to supply these systems for years. When these customers upgrade anything they deploy a new integrated solution with new hardware, OS, and software platform rather than piecemeal. Take out the old hardware off the employee's desk, place the new one in the same spot, plug it in, ready to go.

The business productivity sector is standardized on Microsoft Windows and that's not going to change anytime soon.

The people that would be most irritated are enthusiasts and system builders that don't buy complete systems like everyone else who are refusing to upgrade to 10. This segment of the market is tiny, if vocal, and they are at most a blip in MS's bottom line. Solution here is obvious, don't buy a Kaby Lake or Ryzen board/CPU unless you're ready to upgrade to 10.

You can't really say Linux, BSD, etc are any different than this because they aren't. You have to move to an updated version of your $distro to support new hardware not covered in the old version anyway.

I can understand people's privacy concerns, but for now they're manageable with care on 10. For those that are concerned with MS's shenanagans, remember we've all been warned since 7 (or was it Vista?) that Windows is calling home with telemetry (and no it couldn't be turned off then either, just limited), and Microsoft can and does arbitrarily revoke license codes. Once 8.x was released the writing was already on the wall on what would happen with 10 especially since it was largely released for "free". Frog meet pot.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE: Blocking?
By grat on 2017-03-17 12:40:29
My understanding is that they're blocking *ALL* Windows Updates if you have a new CPU.
Permalink - Score: 3
.
RE: Legality, Necessity
By grat on 2017-03-17 12:41:02
Windows 8.1, however, is still being sold, and doesn't hit end-of-life for another year.
Permalink - Score: 3
.
win-win?
By nicubunu on 2017-03-17 12:52:40
Do I understand correctly that you can install Windows 7 on a PC with such CPU and it will work, except the Windows update service? If so, it sounds like a win-win situation: one can use a version of Windows without built-in "telemetry" spyware, and that spyware won't be sneaked-in later trough an OS update. Still, it has potential for negative PR for Microsoft, another win.
Permalink - Score: 4
.
RE[5]: Remember BIOS lies?
By Alfman on 2017-03-17 13:49:39
Brendan,

> A "somewhat practical" option would be a very thin hypervisor (where Windows runs inside a virtual machine), which can make CPUID say anything it likes. The only real downsides to this approach would be that you probably wouldn't be able to use virtualisation inside Windows, and there'd be a small performance hit involved. Of course if Microsoft only block updates, then you'd only use the hyper-visor when you're updating (and there wouldn't be disadvantages during normal use).

Using a virtual machine just when updates are needed is pretty clever, although I'm not sure how well it would work in practice. The virtualization might interfere with WGA activation, and windows update already disables itself in that case so one might not be able to perform the update anyways even with a permitted CPUID.

Also, even if WGA passed, windows update may never update the non-virtualized hardware drivers because it doesn't see them under virtualization.

So it would be better to avoid running inside of virtualization all together assuming it's possible to change CPUID - I don't know if this is true on intel processors, but apparently it can be done on AMD and VIA processors in order to sidestep CPUID based discrimination, ironically at the hands of Intel itself:

http://www.osnews.com/story/2268...

So maybe Intel has anticipated the need for users to change CPUID on the basis of discrimination against it's own processors...although I haven't found any tools to do this yet.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[2]: Legality, Necessity
By dark2 on 2017-03-17 14:10:58
> For large enterprises and contracted services, this won't even be a blip on the radar.

Yes it will, these guys stayed on Windows XP until the very last moment, and they'll stay on Windows 7 until the very last moment as well. Even with new hardware that comes with Windows 10, the first thing they do is wipe the disk and place their standardized OS image on it.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[2]: Legality, Necessity
By Alfman on 2017-03-17 14:16:16
stormcrow,

> For large enterprises and contracted services, this won't even be a blip on the radar. This is MS's bread and butter. These customers deploy set solutions that include a hardware package, OS, and software platform that are integrated together and have contracts to supply these systems for years. When these customers upgrade anything they deploy a new integrated solution with new hardware, OS, and software platform rather than piecemeal. Take out the old hardware off the employee's desk, place the new one in the same spot, plug it in, ready to go.

Your assessment of enterprise is not universally true. They don't install the latest windows just because microsoft tells them to, it's common for them to hold back windows and use downgrade rights even on new hardware.

When I was an admin and an machine died, we'd purchase new dell business machines under our existing license agreement. The licenses are expensive, I can't speak for anyone else but I can assure you that we didn't install new windows versions just because the machine died. Even if we could have upgraded windows, the training costs, compatibility testing, and fragmentation costs a lot more. Corporations are the whole reason microsoft's support goes to a decade, so these new restrictions by microsoft is bound to cause frustration within enterprises. There's one potential redeeming factor for them, enterprises use a different update mechanism: WSUS. So it's quite possible that microsoft is only applying the CPU discrimination against normal windows update users and not against corporations - if anyone has information about this please link it!


> You can't really say Linux, BSD, etc are any different than this because they aren't. You have to move to an updated version of your $distro to support new hardware not covered in the old version anyway.

Do you have any evidence that this is the case? I'm genuinely curious because typically what happens is that older distros (like a knoppix cd from 2006) simply can't take advantage of the newer features, but they still technically work and don't have a kill switch to prevent them from running on newer computers.

Edited 2017-03-17 14:19 UTC
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE: This type of policy...
By tonny on 2017-03-17 14:25:49
Alternatives? There is. A lot. Come and pick: www.distrowatch.com
Permalink - Score: 2

Read Comments 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-50 -- 51-51

No new comments are allowed for stories older than 10 days.
This story is now archived.

.
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
WAP site - RSS feed
© OSNews LLC 1997-2007. All Rights Reserved.
The readers' comments are owned and a responsibility of whoever posted them.
Prefer the desktop version of OSNews?