Microsoft Ends Mainstream Support For Windows 7

jones_supa writes The mainstream support of Microsoft Windows 7 [ended Monday]. The operating system leaving mainstream support means no more platform updates, no new features, and end of free support. Windows 7 will now enter extended support, which means that security updates will keep coming, and support will be offered for charge. The final end of support for Windows 7 will be reached January 14, 2020. Is anyone nostalgic for Windows 7?

Comments

Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[JourneymanMereel]

I'm not nostalgic for Windows 7.... I still run it! On all of our networked computers.

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[kilfarsnar]

Same here. With Windows XP still hanging on and Windows 8 needlessly messing with the UI, I doubt we'll see Windows 7 going anywhere anytime soon.

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[tom17]

Yeah this, lol. My employer just finished with the Win7 rollout last year!

And on my personal device, I have not had any desire to leave Win7 as of yet. I skipped over Vista so I will likely do the same with 8.

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[Penguinisto]

Pretty much - most corporations have just barely (as in 2-3 years ago at most) updated from XP to Windows 7.

Good luck with pushing 8 to the corporate world... it's about as adoptable as an angry badger with syphilis.

More and more, I'm finding myself working at places where I really don't have to use a Windows UI if I don't want to. Right now I'm typing this on my corporate-issued MacBook Pro, and only rarely do I bother logging onto a Windows server (vSphere client, and even then only out of habit since the web-client works pretty much as well).

Don't get me wrong - Microsoft will still be in the business world for a goodly long time - we still use Outlook/Exchange, Active Directory, and even Sharepoint (for HR/Corp crap - all the important stuff is on Confluence.) Thing is though, Microsoft's hold in business is beginning to show cracks, and I suspect in about 5 years, there will be a bit of a crisis in Redmond...

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[93 Escort Wagon]

I'm not a huge fan of Windows; but, If I need it for something, Windows 7 is the version I install - in a virtual machine. It does seem pretty solid, and 8's UI gets in the way far too much (says this Mac user).

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[macs4all]

More and more, I'm finding myself working at places where I really don't have to use a Windows UI if I don't want to. Right now I'm typing this on my corporate-issued MacBook Pro, and only rarely do I bother logging onto a Windows server (vSphere client, and even then only out of habit since the web-client works pretty much as well).

Just an aside: I'm no fan of MS, even though I have to work in a Windows environment; however, when dealing with MS Servers, I have found that the recent versions of the Microsoft RDC Client for OS X is actually even more capable, just as fast (or maybe even faster), and a WHOLE lot better-mannered than even the Windows native RDC Client.

If you run OS X, but need to "Remote-In" to Windows Servers/Workstations, check it out. It's free, and quite pleasant.

And now I have to go wash my hands for typing something complimentary about Windows...

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[afidel]

Windows 10 is where the enterprise is going. I literally just got out of a meeting where we were discussing our goals for the year and Office 2013 and probably Windows 10 (depending on launch date and apparent buginess) are on the list. As far as your MBP, that's fine for you if you work in IT, but if you think most businesses are going to give every worker drone an expensive Mac with about 5-10x the support cost (as in I have numbers that show our Mac users cost that much more depending on their level of competence/IT independance) you're delusional.

Re:Nostalgic for Windows 7?

[tnk1]

It is definitely much easier to use Windows in the business than Macs, from an IT perspective. There isn't even a comparison. The tools for managing Windows boxes are solid, and provides very simple integration and administration.

If you don't want amateur sysadmins in your Windows boxes, then you don't give them administrator access on their machines.

Windows is also considerably more stable than it used to be. There is no substantial difference in reliability between a Mac and a Win 7 box. Hell, I've been using the an install of Vista, of all things, on a box for at least five years without any difficulty.

As far as security goes, as far as I can tell, the only major difference is that with Windows, you have more malware that has been written for it, but in terms of real security, it is no worse, and it is actually considerably better than a Mac if you consider the fact that an IT department can enforce restrictions on installing software and ensuring patching much more easily with a Windows box.

I've supported both in IT before, and it isn't even close. Which is not to say Windows is perfect or even the best box for the job. There are many developers who love Macs for good reason.. That does not translate, however, into ease of management. For all that Apple is decent at maintaining upgrades on their consumer devices, their business support is crap and getting worse.

Macs are not business machines, they're consumer machines that have to be shoehorned in and managed like special snowflakes.

Very nostalgic

[Anonymous Coward]

I plan to switch to it real soon now.

But

[rossdee]

Some people are even now upgrading to Win 7

I wouldn't touch 8.x with a 3 metre resident of Warsaw

Re:But

[ZosX]

This. I have no desire to stop running win7 anytime soon unless win 10 is magically awesome which I sincerely doubt it will be given the win8 debacle.

Re:But

[rossdee]

As in all the recent ones suck...

Re:But

[NotDrWho]

I resisted 8.1 for a long time because of all the bashing. But I recently rebuilt my system, needed to resintall, and decided to go with 8.1. And it's actually pretty good. It boots fast and has an even smaller footprint than 7. Install was smooth (the only issue was outputting sound over HDMI, which was fixed with my first update). I've not had any crashes or problems so far and I've been using it for several months now. The only problem I have with it interface-wise is with the layout of the start menu, but that took me all of a few minutes to fix.

As usual, don't believe all the anti-Microsoft hype. Some people will bash anything MS does, for any reason (especially on slashdot). If Bill Gates cured cancer tomorrow and gave the cure away for free, posters would be on here in droves complaining that he didn't do it fast enough.

Re:But

[Megol]

Install the 8.1 update and select startup to desktop
Install classic start menu
Disable the idiotic touchpad gestures MS "designed" for Win 8
Optionally install something like ModernMix to be able to run metro apps windowed (I have it installed but never use it)

Voila: A usable Windows installation where one doesn't need to use anything metro/"modern" if one doesn't want to. Somewhat like Windows 7 on steroids.

Re:But

[ganjadude]

ive been working with the 10 tech preview. it fixes all the issues with 8 IMO. Im liking it, but YMMV

Re:But

[dablow]

Windows 8.1 is ok.....

It's just the UI and stupid metro (modern wtv) stupid start menu crap that annoys me.

Also it seems to be a little shizo...some settings are in classic menus...some in modern....

But in terms of stability, performance, it's actually as good as windows 7.

Re:But

[Balthisar]

I'm a Mac user primarily, and a Windows 7 user at work (rollout was completed late last year). Even I don't hate Windows 8.1 (Windows 8.0 did suck, though). It boots to my desktop, I set up my preferences, and I'm mostly all set.

My only gripes are minor: Hiding the Startup Items folder is bad. Not being able to manage files in a folder for a Start Menu is bad. I still can't find crap I've deleted from the Start Screen if it's not a real application (like, say, the Microsoft Store).

Although I don't plan to give up my Macs as primary workhorses (and HTPCs) any time soon, I'm a bit frustrated at all of the B*S* networking issues with Yosemite. Still not enough to make me switch, though.

Re:But

[ganjadude]

yes it does. "metro" is dead in 10, metro apps are now in the start menu (think windows 7 menu) you have the standard XP classic startmenu, and attached to that similar to 7 your metro tiles live.

Metro apps open on the desktop and are resizable unlike in 8/ 8,1 where you have to be in metro like it were an app itself. To top it off, it is fast, much faster than 7 or 8 (SSD 8 gig of ram phenom 2 setup)

Re:But

[LWATCDR]

Yes.
You only get the tiled interface on Tablets and maybe touch devices....
In other words the way it really should have worked from the start.

Re:But

[LWATCDR]

"99% of the people bashing the windows 8 interface haven't used it for more than an hour."
As someone that has used and liked AmigaOS, MacOS, OS/X, LinuxKDE, LinuxGnome, Windows, Windows95, 98, 2000, XP, and 7.... If I use a UI for an hour and still hate it I am done.
Windows 8 UI works well on tablets, it is okay on touch devices, it is useless on a traditional desktop or laptop.
The core OS is actually really good but the UI is bad for the majority of users. It gives little to no added value for the pain provided.

Re:But

[Paco103]

Install classic shell. I actually like Windows 8 except for the UI. Classic Shell (and Aero 8 if you want the eye candy effects), solves that problem entirely.

Re:But

[afidel]

Actually, it's going to be a bit cooler than that, if you have a touch device then metro apps will by default work like they do in 8, if not they'll be windowed, and if you have a convertible like the Surface Pro line then it will change behavior depending on the current configuration (again, by default, MS has heard the masses and will allow you to tweak the behavior).

Re:But

[jeffmflanagan]

>99% of the people bashing the windows 8 interface haven't used it for more than an hour. They go crazy when anything changes

That's complete bullshit, and you know it. The terrible changes in Win 8 were done to try to drive traffic to an app store, and to run on tablets. They actually harm the user-experience on the desktop. This is not people freaking out over change, this is people rejecting a broken UI.

I have to assume that there's something seriously wrong with you, causing you to call people crazy for rejecting an inferior OS. Is the rest of your worldview this screwy?

Re:But

[StormReaver]

If Bill Gates cured cancer tomorrow and gave the cure away for free, posters would be on here in droves complaining that he didn't do it fast enough.

If Bill Gates cured cancer and gave the cure away for free:

1) The first cure would be free.

2) The cure would be designed to reactivate the cancer, this time being more virulent than the original, but this time it would be immune to the free cure.

3) The second cure would require activation and frequent repurchases, or the cure would be rendered inert (killing you). You would be required to repurchase the cure for the rest of your life.

4) You would be required to purchase cures for diseases you don't have, but taxing your indocrine system to the point that random body parts start failing.

5) Bill Gates would issue patches for the flawed cure, but the patches would inexplicable cause new diseases for which you would be required to purchase 3rd party medicines. These medicines would themselves drain 60% of your body's useable energy, and unpredictable times, while unsuccessfully attempting to address the fundamental design flaws of the cure.

6) Bill Gates would promise that the next version of the cure will solve your problems, but that it is not covered by any licensing agreement you may currently have. The promise is false, but you don't seem to remember any of the other false promises he made, so you purchase the next version of the cure. This somehow makes things worse, but Bill Gates blames you for using 3rd party medicines.

I could go on, but I have work to do.

Re:But

[DarkOx]

The funny part is the role reversal. To make efficient use of the Win 8.x start menu, you either need a touch device or you have to use the keyboard short cuts. Otherwise you are picking up the mouse, locating the startmenu, putting the mouse down to start typing a search string, then picking the mouse back up to click the result.

I use it on my VM, its actually a blazing fast way to find stuff if you go all keyboard, but get the mouse involved and its tedious. I don't have so many desktop applications that anyhting is more than a few clicks away in my organized XFCE doc though on Linux or the old start menu wasn't pretty efficient with the mouse.

Thing is keyboard shortcuts really are probably better and the search function saves the steps of actually defining all those shortcuts.

It makes me laugh though because if I suggested on any Linux UI that a former Windows user learn the keys, I was an apologist for an apparent UI failure. Now all the Windows folks are running around insisting the UI is just fine because its fast with the keyboard!

Re:But

[Just Some Guy]

We bought a laptop for my then-12-year-old son so he could play Minecraft without using ours. It shipped with Windows 8 and he is young and unexperienced enough to not have any prior opinions. And above all else, it was his beloved Christmas laptop, not some random beige box that an employer shoved onto his desk. In other words, this was the best possible scenario for someone to like Windows 8.

Two years later, he despises the desktop with a passion. Sure, his programs run well once he launches them, but everything else is a hassle. It looks weird. Nothing works like the lab computers at school. His friends don't have anything like it. It's obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious, and I've heard plenty of complaints about Windows itself since we got it. They're good natured and he isn't ungrateful: when I asked him if he liked his laptop, he told me he loves it and it runs great, "but is the next Windows going to be less stupid?"

If you make a UI change and Retirement Joe in the office pool doesn't like it, well, that's probably just Joe being crotchety and close-minded. But what's it say when a malleable early teen who didn't have preconceived notions also thinks it's illogical and weird? I think it says you've done something very, very wrong.

It will get security patches for the next 5 years

[wiredog]

Which is about 5 years longer than any version of Android older than 5.0 will get them.

Re:Win7 is the new XP

[davidwr]

I'm sure they are hoping this will push people into Microsoft-branded cloud services.

Re:The beast and the hero

[Half-pint HAL]

The bad news is that they skipped 9, which was scheduled to be a good one....

Re:It was the best Windows

[Octorian]

Don't kid yourself. XP was just as bad as Vista at first, but everyone forgets that. It didn't become the "Windows to stand the ultimate test of time" until XP SP2.

Windows 2000 was also one of the best versions, IMHO. It just often gets left out, because it wasn't marketed to "the average home user." (But I wish it had been, instead of that trash called ME.)

Re:Where's the replacement?

[rafjaimes]

You can try 10 Technical Preview. It is Windows 8.1 with Metro condensed to a start menu. It still has some full-screen hijacking apps and tons of bloat from Bing and the "App" Store. This might be ok for some people but it sounds like Microsoft is going down the wrong road for those of us that like a clean, controlled, and predictable system. Linux may be the answer for many if it has the right program support, but it's possible that 7 is the last sane OS from Microsoft.

Re:No nostalgia for something you use every day.

[Enry]

I had a university as a client last year and they had at least one Windows 3.1 system still in operation in a research capacity. XP is still all over the place.

Re:Win7 is the new XP

[pla]

Microsoft made a terrible mistake in allowing enterprises to remain on XP so long and thus allowing this culture of not upgrading to take place.

"Allowing"? Good one!

If Microsoft had tried to force companies to migrate to Vista, we would have seen 2007 as finally the year of "Linux on the Desktop".

Software vendors need to get a grip on their role in the ecosystem. They serve us, not the other way around. When people still run XP (hell, people still run 95!), that should tell Microsoft everything it needs to know about the viability of continuing its current trend toward forcing rapid unwanted change on people.

Re:Sigh...

[dablow]

Welcome to IT.

Leave you dignity and expertise at the door. Do everything as cheap as possible in the short term.

You are a cost to the company, with nothing of value to contribute to the core business, be glad we took pity on your and gave you a job.

Sounds familiar?

Upgrading?

[Cyfun]

You know your new OS is awful when people "upgrade" to the previous version.

But... If evil is the product, it's quite good!

[Futurepower(R)]

"Good luck with pushing 8 to the corporate world... it's about as adoptable as an angry badger with syphilis."

Don't you just hate it when people are excessively positive about Microsoft?