Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2016 September 2

= September 2 =

windows 10 cpus
micro$oft is banging the drum about new "kerby lake" CPUs only working with windows 10 from now on. Please tell me, are they going to actually make it so Windows 7 won't work at all? Because as I understand it modern x86-64 CPUs can still be used by MS DOS and other ancient operator systems, so if MS DOS can work on kerby lake why would Windows 7 stop working unless micro$hit deliberately put in a block — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbartdf93493 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * According to this PC World article Microsoft will not be releasing drivers for Kerby Lake processors for Windows 7 or 8/8.1. The article speculates that "the processor would boot, though without driver support and security updates the experience would be “a bit glitchy”", so really I guess it depends on your definition of 'work at all'. X86 processors work on Windows 7 because there are specific drivers that allow the OS to interact with the CPU. Without those drivers, things will be difficult. As for why MS would do this, I guess their reasoning would be that by focussing resources on supporting a single modern OS they will be able to offer the best possible experience in that OS. Another way to phrase that would be 'profit' - they are a business, after all. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 13:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Most old software should run fine on newer CPUs. The exception can be low-level device drivers that need to be designed to work with the details of the system architecture (e.g. PCI, Video, IO configuration).  It is conceivable that some of the Windows 7/8 device drivers would need upgrading to run on systems designed for Kaby Lake.  So, it is possible that current versions of Windows 7 won't run properly on Kaby Lake, though I would find it more likely that Windows 7 would run but some of your peripherals / add-on cards would no longer work.  However, even if there is a legitimate aspect of the OS that won't work on the new hardware, it shouldn't be overly hard to fix the drivers (if MS wanted to do so).  Seems like it is basically an effort to force people to use the newer OS.  Dragons flight (talk) 13:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Not that there's anything wrong with Broadwell/Haswell or Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge cpus...  Fr&and;m&isin; Dr&and;g talk 13:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I do not think it contributes positively to any technical discussion when the OP levies blatant (albeit bowdlerized) insult into their request for references.
 * If you have a real technical problem with Microsoft products, we will try to answer it by referring you to high-quality resources. If you have a legitimate grievance that is related to your question, you may make your case, but refer to our style guidelines on writing with an encyclopedic tone.  If you simply wish to lob insults at a major software company, the reference desk is not the right place for you to participate.  We can direct you to internet forums where casual discussions may take place and the conversations abide by a different set of standards.
 * I think the original post is couched in a dramatic misunderstanding about how backward compatibility really works in modern computers. Backward compatibility requires effort, and commercial companies require money before they provide effort.  If you need a specific feature, Microsoft provides a partners program (and so does Intel).  Both corporations provide a forum where you can work directly with their sales and engineering teams to meet your needs.  Microsoft sells non-free software and services: so just because you aren't paying for a feature does not mean that it isn't available to somebody else.
 * If you don't have the budget to engage with a large company - because you are a single individual, for example - then you're going to be stuck with the commodity, retail versions of the products they offer... and those are geared for the "common use case," rather than tailored to your individual needs.
 * There's no need to be angry about it. That is how retail works.  Do you complain that your local fast-food hamburger shop won't sell you a high-quality steak?  They've got a business model to deliver commonly-purchased products at low prices.  Other places - fancy restaurants - exist that sell gourmet meals at premium prices... but only if you can pay what they ask!  ...And gourmet steak chefs are a lot cheaper by the hour than software developers!
 * Nimur (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Kaby Lake says: "On January 15, 2016, Microsoft announced that Windows 10 would be the only supported Windows platform for Kaby Lake processors. This was later changed, allowing for applicable security updates until the end of support for Windows 7 and Windows 8.1." Akld guy (talk) 20:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The problem is not drivers for the CPU itself because it does not need those - from the point of view of Windows 7 Kaby Lake will not be much different from, say, Sandy Bridge. The problem is Intel chipsets that support Kaby Lake. For instance 200-series chipset will support only XHCI usb standard, which is supported by Win10 but not by earlier Windows versions. The result is that on a Kaby Lake system Windows 7 can not be installed from a flash driver effectively making it an obsolete OS. Ruslik_ Zero 21:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * AFAICT, there seem to be 2 different issues here. Number one as Ruslik_Zero mentioned is that new CPU's have new platforms. I'd normally say chipset too but actually in this case were probably should be careful. With modern SoC CPUs, it isn't just the external chipset but the CPU itself that can be different enough that without new drivers, support may be iffy at best. In other words, just because the core x86-64 CPU may not be that different, doesn't mean the GPU, PCI-express, USB etc etc aren't. This is a combination of Intel and Microsoft although ultimately I don't think Microsoft is actually doing anything to stop anyone (including third parties for that matter, if they had sufficient info except the need for signed drivers) so it's more on Intel than on Microsoft. The second issue though is simply that Microsoft is not going to support such configs. This doesn't mean that they're going to intentionally break anything, but simply that if something does break, including with new updates, they're aren't going to fix it  . Or likewise if it's already broken. (Of course when something does break, it can be difficult to know why and conspiracy theorists may suggest it was intentional, but while I've seen a lot of questionable activity, I think there's a very good chance here if it happens it was indeed mostly an accident.) This is most relevant to businesses or others with some sort of support contract and often aren't willing to do stuff like hope and pray it doesn't break or use random modified files or ignore important security updates because it breaks stuff on their unsupported config.  From what I've read, I get the feeling a lot of people underestimate how much time and effort Microsoft puts into ensuring compatibility for the wide array of hardware out there, something that Nimur and others have touched on. Mostly I guess because of the plenty of examples where things have gone wrong, also I suspect because it can be hard to realise how easy it is for that to happen. As the sources I provided make clear, this isn't something new to Kaby Lake. Nor is it new to Windows 10. For that matter although my sources don't mention this, the driver issue isn't new either.  Nil Einne (talk) 13:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)