Microsoft extends support for Skylake powered Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 systems

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: Microsoft extends support for Skylake powered Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 systems[newsimage]http://www.myce.com/wp-content/images_posts/2014/05/Windows_logo_-_2012-95x75.png[/newsimage]

Microsoft has extended the support period for systems powered by a Skylake CPU that are running Windows 7 and Windows 8.1. Intel’s upcoming CPU generation, Kaby Lake, will still only be supported on Windows 10.

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/microsoft-extends-support-skylake-powered-windows-7-windows-8-1-systems-80196/](http://www.myce.com/news/microsoft-extends-support-skylake-powered-windows-7-windows-8-1-systems-80196/)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

The only logical move, but when was Microsoft ever logical?
However :clap::clap::clap:


#3

Geeze could it be that Win10 isn’t hot as they want it to be??? :stuck_out_tongue:


#4

[QUOTE=coolcolors;2779323]Geeze could it be that Win10 isn’t hot as they want it to be??? :p[/QUOTE]
LOL :bigsmile:
In this case I think we should rejoice in the fact that they choose to extend it and show at least some return to form, the way we used to know them, as a responsible developer with true long term support for legacy operating systems :iagree:


#5

[QUOTE=Xercus;2779324]LOL :bigsmile:
In this case I think we should rejoice in the fact that they choose to extend it and show at least some return to form, the way we used to know them, as a responsible developer with true long term support for legacy operating systems :iagree:[/QUOTE]
They can make Windows 10 where everyone can customize the look and feel and trust me that will sell like hot cakes and Windows 7 would die a quick death. But oh no, we(MS) knows your computer better then you. That kinda mentality will go no where fast as evident by the slow Windows 10 market shares.


#6

^We agree on that subject, an open interface is what is needed, after all who is to tell me what is better for me. Give me a set of rules and give me power to take it from there. It is really all that is needed.
Then there is that other aspect, listen to the users! Collect only the bare essentials of what you need to develop the OS, not any and everything. A few more’s and we’re home. They will have to adapt to markets though, and so they look in envy towards the app stores, but they really do not have to as they already have a winning formula/effective monopoly, so the interesting question is why?
The possible answer is they’re looking for ways to earn even more/getting better margins. What I can not figure out is why they are seemingly willing to risk their entire existing user base to achieve it. No one, not even MS is THAT big and there are always some waiting in the shadows.

In this isolated case however, I think MS is worthy of a clap on the shoulder - Way to go! :wink:


#7

Personally, I don’t think Microsoft should be paying any attention to what CPU you have. It shouldn’t matter if you have the latest Kaby Lake CPU, or some old XP-era uniprocessor. The software updates should come regardless of how old the hardware is.[QUOTE=Xercus;2779338]They will have to adapt to markets though, and so they look in envy towards the app stores, but they really do not have to as they already have a winning formula/effective monopoly, so the interesting question is why?
The possible answer is they’re looking for ways to earn even more/getting better margins. What I can not figure out is why they are seemingly willing to risk their entire existing user base to achieve it. No one, not even MS is THAT big and there are always some waiting in the shadows.[/QUOTE]That’s probably what people said when IBM tried to enter the microcomputer market. I wasn’t born until the 1990s, so I can’t say what the public though in the early 1980s, but I assume someone must have said “They practically have a monopoly on mainframes, what could they gain from selling cheap microcomputers?” But, IBM was smart enough to realize PCs weren’t going away. Rather, they probably saw that PCs were only going to become more mainstream in the future.

Microsoft has most likely seen something similar in hand-held devices. Therefore, they probably feel they must do whatever the leaders in the field of hand-held computing are doing until they can claim leadership themselves. If that happens, others will likewise feel like they [I]must[/I] imitate Microsoft.


#8

Sounds like it was a bit of a cynical ploy to force certain users off Win 7 or 8.1, just 2 weeks after the free upgrade period “expires” they do a u turn. Probably nowhere near as many upgraders as Microsoft thought/hoped for so the decision had to be reversed.


#9

[QUOTE=TSJnachos117;2779366]That’s probably what people said when IBM tried to enter the microcomputer market. I wasn’t born until the 1990s, so I can’t say what the public though in the early 1980s, but I assume someone must have said “They practically have a monopoly on mainframes, what could they gain from selling cheap microcomputers?” But, IBM was smart enough to realize PCs weren’t going away. Rather, they probably saw that PCs were only going to become more mainstream in the future.

Microsoft has most likely seen something similar in hand-held devices. Therefore, they probably feel they must do whatever the leaders in the field of hand-held computing are doing until they can claim leadership themselves. If that happens, others will likewise feel like they [I]must[/I] imitate Microsoft.[/QUOTE]
First of all, IBM never sold ‘cheap’ microcomputers :bigsmile:, secondly, there is a big difference between going into another market and tweaking an existing OS in a way that has received much negative mention.

I was around in the eighties, but I do not recall any negative attitude towards IBM going into the client computer market. However, I do recall much negative mention regarding their arrogance and ignorance towards customers in the server market. As we know, they got hit quite badly some years later when Microsoft came along with their NT4 and the rest is history. Now, that would qualify as a comparison to what may happen to Microsoft’s client OS unless they start listening to the users and rather continue their travel on ‘ignorance avenue’. The sheer amount of 3rd-party tweaks and tools, both legal and well in the grey at least should tell Microsoft that there are a lot of users who disagree with their present direction.

What I notice is that there are several Linux distros being made with the more casual user in mind and given a little time, they may become real competition to Windows which really is the oddball compared to the rest, even MAC (that’s just BSD and so sort of Linux as well).


#10

I understand microcomputers were, by nature, cheap compared to mainframes (and probably still are). I also understand that IBM was, up till that point, best known for mainframes. I’m sure the IBM PC was cheap compared to whatever their newest mainframe was. The price compared to other micros was, I assume, another story.

Of course, the negativity towards IBM in the early 1980s was just an assumption on my part. My bad, I guess.

In any case, Microsoft’s theoretical motivation doesn’t make the bad things they’ve done right. Microsoft doesn’t have the right to spy on people “because we’re just imitating Google. They did it first.”