Slashdot Mirror


New Intel and AMD Chips Will Only Support Windows 10 (pcworld.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Buried in the announcement of the new Kaby Lake (seventh-generation) processors and a rash of incoming notebooks set to use them is the confirmation that they will have a Windows 10 future. Microsoft has been warning people for ages that Kaby Lake will not run on anything older than Windows 10, and it looks like AMD's upcoming Zen chip will be going the same way. Microsoft said, "As new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support. 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." "We are committed to working with Microsoft and our ecosystem partners to help ensure a smooth transition given these changes to Microsoft's Windows support policy," an Intel spokesperson said. "No, Intel will not be updating Win 7/8 drivers for 7th Gen Intel Core [Kaby Lake] per Microsoft's support policy change." An AMD representative was equally neutral. "AMD's processor roadmap is fully aligned with Microsoft's software strategy," AMD chief technical officer Mark Papermaster said, via a company spokeswoman. Slashdot reader MojoKid via HotHardware has some more details on Intel's Kaby Lake 7th Gen Core Series Processors for those yearning to learn more.

52 of 585 comments (clear)

  1. Goodbye Windows. by Berkyjay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hello Linux

    1. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I expect UEFI lock down will soon prevent Linux from being installed.

    2. Re:Goodbye Windows. by BringsApples · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then goodbye Intel and AMD.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    3. Re:Goodbye Windows. by FudRucker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux developers will have it cracked and running any distro within a few days, AMD & Intel is not going to shoot themselves in the foot, microsoft might commit corporate suicide

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    4. Re:Goodbye Windows. by AchilleTalon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pretty much silly reasoning given the number of Linux servers around the world. Almost every large corporate is depending on Linux for something.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    5. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What about Linux? Microsoft's Kaby Lake support or lack of it appears to be based on detecting the processor version, and not any lack of backward compatibility in the chip architecture.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    6. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Berkyjay · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To give you some perspective. I use Win7 as my home/gaming OS and Linux as my work/dev OS. I went to Win10, tried it for a month, grew to hate it. Went back to Win7 to wait for Win10 to improve in a few more years. But if MS doesn't want to give me the option to avoid Win10 then I'll just start finding a way to work Linux into being my full time OS.

    7. Re:Goodbye Windows. by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux developers will have it cracked and running any distro within a few days, AMD & Intel is not going to shoot themselves in the foot, microsoft might commit corporate suicide

      And I would be surprised if Intel and AMD didn't actually help Linux developers do it.

      This whole thing smells of Microsoft trying to sell more Windows 10, not Intel and AMD trying to sell fewer chips.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    8. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Replying on my CI20 running Debian 8.

      I use this machine mostly as a home jukebox system (Attached to the PA system.) And sometimes for lite web browsing if I'm in the garage (where it sits by the main for the PA system.)

      MIPS is trying to become relevant again. There are a couple of Russian workstations coming out on the Baikal T-1 and Imgtec is still trying to establish their footing in the embedded board arena. (Thus the CI20 i'm on.)

      For general desktop use, this baby can handle websites like /. (but not much more javascript.) IRC, Pidgin, Email, Nethack, etc. What more do you need? All kidding aside, the hardware technology is there, what MIPS lacks however is developers, optimized drivers, and scale production to bring down costs. In that order. Judging from the GIT repos, ImgTec devs moved on to IoT ci40 and abandoned ci20... Without improved drivers/browsers I believe this won't be the decade of the MIPS desktop.

      *Note speaking about desktop mips and not networking mips.
      *Slash dot Captcha: Idealism >.>

    9. Re: Goodbye Windows. by inode_buddha · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or my favorite, the DEC Alpha...

      --
      C|N>K
    10. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Erm... Linux runs just fine on numerous ARM designs, and the hardware can happily support modern applications as well. Have you used an Android phone lately, as perhaps the most recognisable example of this actually being done?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    11. Re:Goodbye Windows. by cfalcon · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Fuck Linux.

      I mean, Linux is pretty hot, but... I can't find any holes!

    12. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Isca · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is actually good for news linux developers, just not in the way most people think. A very large part of this push is to try to make yet another step away from legacy x86 code. Newer windows binaries is much more easier to port to other systems and in fact Microsoft is developing the tools to do quite a bit of this for you. All of this easy to port code will be easy to port to linux and any other OS you want. Microsoft is trying to become the place to go for cloud hosted computing and while they know they are way behind apple and google right now they can stay relevant by making their tools and back end services work with as many different platforms as possible. It will be interesting to see what the market looks like 5 or 10 years from now. Who ever thought Microsoft would have even done a 10th of what they have done in the past year or two for open source based on what they were like 10 years ago? The landscape has changed and Google is becoming more and more restrictive with what they do and how they handle your data every year. Apple is the same, but they've always been like that to a degree.

    13. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      AFAIK this is only about Microsoft choosing to support chip features in Win 10 only, not that the chip manufacturers are barring other OSes. If that assumption is right then I don't understand why such a misleading submission was posted without correction on Slashdot.

    14. Re:Goodbye Windows. by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wonder why this comment is rated as insightful.

      Because people found it insightful. The moderation system is not that complicated.

      For a Windows 7, Windows 8 or whatever version of Windows user but 10, the alternative is not Windows 10 or Linux.

      That's true. They could also become a Mac user.

      If he cannot keep his old version of Windows, he will jump to Windows 10 which is much more similar to his computer experience than Linux.

      It is in one significant way: software support. In any other way, it really is not.

      This user is not driven by irrational hate against Microsoft and Windows since he would like to continue to use an older version of Windows.

      I'm not driven by irrational hate. I'm driven by rational dislike and distrust. Windows 10 is spyware on a level that I won't permit on my network. I can (so far) keep that stuff out of my Windows 7, with some effort. I won't be buying any software which requires Windows 10, ever. So long as I can keep a machine running Windows 7, which I should be able to do with hardware on hand for the foreseeable future, I don't give a fig for Windows 10.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Goodbye Windows. by jstwinkles · · Score: 3, Interesting

      UEFI doesn't have anything to do with what OS you can install and run (aside from compatibility issues one might encounter when trying to run legacy software). If you're thinking of things like Intel Boot Guard or UEFI Secure Boot, those are meant to prevent modification to the firmware image stored on the motherboard's ROM chip, not lock down the OS. The only way to restrict what OS you can load would be to add in very specific code outside the scope of the UEFI spec that probes the boot media and says yay or nay to different OSes. Basically, Intel, UEFI/BIOS devs, and motherboard manufacturers would all have to conspire together against Linux and I think they all know it would not be in their best interests to do so, given that so much of the IT infrastructure and technical community of the world runs it. This is Microsoft just trying to suck in even more people to Malware 10. There aren't even any real differences between the Skylake chips already out there and the Kaby Lake chips according to several articles I've seen. The difference in driver code (which is ostensibly the reason for the lack of support) would essentially be the difference of a #defined version number, not any actual implementation differences.

    16. Re:Goodbye Windows. by Tough+Love · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Linux will probably support the chips before Windows does.

      It is a practical certainty that Linux already supports Kaby Lake and that no special code is/was needed. It is also a practical certainty that Intel tested the new chips with Linux extensively, including performance testing, given how much of their business depends on Linux these days. Compilers and support libraries will need updates to take advantage of the new media and crypto instructions, no big hurry there, but indeed, Linux is likely to have these optimizations before Windows does.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    17. Re:Goodbye Windows. by The+Real+Dr+John · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The push to force Windows 10 has now reached absurd proportions. Windows 7 is going to be my last version of Windows, and that means I won't be buying new Intel or AMD processors if they are going this route. Windows 10 is not particularly popular in its current form, so I am not at all sure why other companies would want to jump on that shit wagon.

      --
      A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
  2. linux etc by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ok.. so... im fine in principle if intel and microsoft aren't interested in porting chipset drivers backwards for old windows versions.

    I presume that this isn't creating windows 10 lock in though; and that linux / bsd / etc will be fully supported?? Or am I mistaken?

    And also, is if things are that different, does it mean only a next-generation kernel version will run on them?

    I'm also curious about virtualization? Can old windows versions run in virtualization on these new chips?

    1. Re:linux etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This thing needs to be pulled apart and examined from a slightly higher level.

      First of all, it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that these chips do not support Windows 7 or 8 outright. Intel and AMD, despite their apparent lobotomy, will only shoot themselves in the foot if they start making x86 architecture backwards-incompatible. Indeed, the fact of the matter is that this is the one thing they bring to market that ensures their dominance. Additionally the processor itself is unlikely to be able to specifically lock on to Windows 7 or 8 and refuse to run because of that.

      Furthermore, Windows 7 or 8 out of the box CANNOT recognize these new chipsets and CANNOT refuse to install because of them. If someone sucks down all the updates Microsoft throws at them, there may well be a Win 7 update that deliberately bricks it somewhere down the line. But if you keep updates off Windows 7 will not commit suicide on behalf of Microsoft, at least not in this manner.

      What is more likely is that things like the chipset drivers are not going to be backported. Does this mean inherent incompatibility? The answer for that is unclear. It is likely, IMO, that it will run, but with degraded performance, e.g. a lot of the onboard goodies may not work. I doubt that it is so obsessed with specific drivers that everything will be disabled. For instance, I imagine USB 2.0 will work but 3.1 might not. It is also possible that there may be attempts by users to backport the drivers, which may or may not be successful. In terms of the need for a next-generation kernel, if the chipsets are so incompatible that they REQUIRE new drivers to operate, and there is no way around that, even by using legacy protocols and drivers, then yes, only a next-generation kernel will run on it. However, that strikes me as unlikely (although it's possible, at least in theory).

      Now, is any of this absolutely for certain? No, not really; the only way to test that out is to actually attempt to install it.

      In terms of virtualization, unless Intel has put in some kind of anti-virtualization sabotage to shoot down Windows 7 (which again would be difficult for the processor to detect), it is unlikely that it will work.

      In terms of Secure Boot, that IS a problem, but it is an entirely separate problem that, in theory, applies to all recent UEFI machines. It may very well cause serious problems for Linux installations. I've heard some references to a signed version of GRUB, but I think that there is a serious danger of Microsoft cooking up ridiculous reasons for refusing to sign binaries for anything they dislike. Additionally I recall hearing on at least one occasion about needing everything in the boot loader's chain to be signed (e.g. drivers). I do not know how they would manage that once the kernel is running, but if that is the case then that is a significant problem, and any machine which Secure Boot cannot be disabled on is as such essentially Microsoft-owned hardware.

      Ultimately what this boils down to is part sabotage and part FUD with Intel and AMD being willing co-conspirators with Microsoft, and essentially participating in collusion. I'm not sure why Intel and AMD are so loyal to Microsoft, though; Microsoft has demonstrated it has no loyalty to x86, and has done so repeatedly over the years (see: Windows Phone, Windows NT for Alpha, etc.).

    2. Re:linux etc by Gavagai80 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Political correctness is the being polite and considerate to others of today. But don't worry, liberals like the ACLU will continue to fight for your right to be offensive. The only thing we don't do is pretend you're not offensive.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  3. Collusion is illegal by HBI · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder if they are tracking this. I think they need to be reminded of this - all three of them.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:Collusion is illegal by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not collusion, they've been doing that for years, this is planned obsolescence. People aren't buying new hardware because they don't need it. Newer processors aren't any faster overall and haven't been for years now. You have to go back almost 5 generations to get a significant difference between mainstream Intel CPU's (single thread performance) that would be enough to justify buying a new processor. The focus on power efficiency has essentially stalled all growth in processor power.

      So they are doing what they can, you want new hardware you need a new OS. They think it's a win win for both of them, though i think it will delay the upgrade cycle even more and will end up hurting them.

    2. Re:Collusion is illegal by Khyber · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is zero reason for Windows 7 to not work with the processor. Otherwise, you might as well NOT call it x86.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    3. Re:Collusion is illegal by Truekaiser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The article is misleading. It is not that the chips won't work with the older os's. It is that only windows 10 compared to previous versions will support their newer features. Stuff like enhanced speed stepping and powering down cores when not in use.

    4. Re:Collusion is illegal by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So it's collusion when an auto manufacturer stops selling older model cars?

      No.... It's collusion when the Auto manufacturer makes an agreement with the Auto shops to stop carrying the
      proper replacement parts that fit your older cars.

      Or it's collusion, when diskette manufacturer X comes out with a new diskette size and makes a deal with laptop manufacturers to stop supporting the older diskette size on their laptops, only the new one.

    5. Re:Collusion is illegal by sexconker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Intel already tried to break the Windows 10 installer with their latest chipsets.

      They forced the USB controller into XHCI mode for no reason, so when you get to the point in the Windows 7 installer where you need to interact with it, you're fucked if you're using USB installation media or a USB keyboard. Using an optical drive and an unattended setup answers file or an optical drive and a PS/2 keyboard works. Guess which things modern Intel platforms tend not to have.

      Of course, the Taiwanese mobo manufacturers all released the workarounds (use a DVD and a PS/2 keyboard, use USB ports 7 and 8 which are powered by the non-Intel controller, etc.) and even published tools to patch the Windows 7 installer to just make it work. Intel and MS responded after much outcry by releasing official versions of those same tools.

      Fuck both Intel and MS. If AMD goes the same way, fuck them too. Windows 10 is the worst thing to happen in computing this decade.

    6. Re:Collusion is illegal by sexconker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Windows 7 is not EOL. It's in the extended support (security and major bug patches only) stage.
      Further, drivers for Windows 7 and Windows 10 are basically the same. This is nothing like the difference between writing drivers for Windows XP and writing drivers for Windows Vista.

  4. Linux anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Windows 10 will be the only Microsoft OS to support new Intel and AMD chips"

    Little to see here, moving on.

  5. In time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It will be illegal to run any other version than Windows 10.

    1. Re:In time by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is unexpectedly insightful. This is the way the corporations want it to be: only "approved" devices connected to the Internet will be legal.

    2. Re:In time by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It will be illegal to run any other version than Windows 10.

      In time it will be illegal to possess a general-purpose computer.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    3. Re:In time by BringsApples · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...and a wired connection of any type.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  6. Forced Obsolecence by darkwyrm76 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it weren't for dirty tricks like this, users would treat Windows 7 like XP... M$ would need to pry it from their cold, dead hands.

  7. Doesn't matter by DogDude · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It doesn't matter. I would imagine 95% of all Windows licenses are sold with hardware, anyway. We are going to keep buying refurb machines with Windows 7 licenses, because that's the OS we need. The hardware really hasn't mattered for workstations for a decade or so, anyway.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  8. CPU & OS Backdoored For Your Pleasure by zenlessyank · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Soon all our machines will be totally infected with spyware sponsored by our own tax dollars.

  9. Bad news for Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Their notebooks are DOOMED.

  10. Re:I'm calling bullshit by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wow, Microsoft must be paying a fuckton of money to AMD. Windows 7 is still 47% (down only about 5% from Q1 2016 and probably not moving any farther now that free upgrades are over). If my competitor stood up and said "we are walking away from half of the market" my response would be "We are committed to supporting the half of the market our competitor just abandoned."

    Is AMD independently wealthy enough to also ignore half of the market, or is Microsoft making them wealthy enough to do so? Stockholders ought to be asking that question right now, especially given the weak position that AMD is in.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  11. Linux supported by UEFI by perpenso · · Score: 5, Informative

    I expect UEFI lock down will soon prevent Linux from being installed.

    Linux is already supported by UEFI. The major Linux distros have paid the one-time US$99 fee to be able to get their code on the UEFI supported list.

    1. Re:Linux supported by UEFI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Only until Microsoft changes its signing certificate.

      Then they won't work anymore. Just like it didn't work for Windows RT devices.

  12. "Will Only Support Windows 10" by swell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The headline is crystal clear. Linux, Mac, Win 7-- fuggedaboudit.

    Or is this another Slashdot clickbait? Ah, they are off the hook because they copied the clickbait at PCWorld. At least PCWorld had the decency to add this statement "But a change in Microsoftâ(TM)s support policy means that it will be only be officially supported by Windows 10." which seems to soften the misleading headline.

    As most here agree, ways will be found to deploy these chips in a useful direction despite the monopolistic desires of Microsoft.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
  13. Re:Sounds like Android ... by Berkyjay · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Intel chips still support Windows XP. Funny how all of a sudden Windows 7 will be such a pain to support for future architecture.

  14. Orwellian much? by Joska · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Intel and AMD are so committed to a good and trustworthy experience for their customers that they are only accommodating installation of the perpetual beta, that data mining sensation, Windows 10? This constitutes a big bet that nearly all of their customers are completely ignorant or utter fools, with the remainder being an insignificant minority that can safely be ignored.

    After 20 years of Windows, I'm finally in the process of switching to Linux. I can clearly tolerate a somewhat rubbish OS for a long time but when it's essentially a sinister joke and a toy rather than a serious tool, even a procrastinator like me is motivated to make a change. Of course much of the Win 10 evil has been back ported to Win 7 and 8 but could in theory be avoided. After a while though, one tires of the cat and mouse game of choosing which updates to avoid and now how to get around the update rollups. This business with chip support is just the most recent slap in the face from an increasingly cynical and adversarial Microsoft who is apparently the driving force in this present fiasco.

    KDE Neon, for example, is way faster on an old laptop than Windows on a recent Xeon workstation, so this no painful switch. Thus ends the promise of Longhorn, at least for me.

  15. Re:Hello Wine or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    When dealing with Some aspects of the m$ ecosystem, wine is completely inadequate; start with a good single malt Scotch and work from there...

  16. This is truly revolutionary by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 4, Funny

    Summary says, "Kaby Lake will not run on anything older than Windows 10".

    In the past, operating systems ran on CPUs, not the other way around. So this is truly revolutionary!

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  17. Re:Finally we will get high end computers by Joska · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Right. It's high school debating tactics and not a reasoned analysis when you simply ignore or gloss over any inconvenient truths and push your conclusion or more precisely, belief or claim, with everything you've got. So tiresome. If anyone can be bothered to refute any of your claims point by point, I'll leave it to them.

  18. Re:Hello Wine by cfalcon · · Score: 5, Funny

    > Wine is often sufficient.

    No, it stands for Wine Is Nearly Enough

  19. Re: Hello Wine by cfalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Find an open source equiv app

    Some times there isn't one. Games are the biggest deal for this.

  20. No problem by Trogre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just add these to the growing list of hardware that is Linux only.

    It's usually older gear such as PCI cards or scanners that makes the list, so it's nice to have some newer CPUs on our side too.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  21. "deep integration between Windows and the silicon" by Snufu · · Score: 3, Funny

    Skin crawling.

  22. Article headline from the Onion or just techie cli by marmot7 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It comes off as *only* Windows 10. That's borderline Huffpo click bait as of course x86 Linux users don't have to lose a moment's sleep over this distressing headline. :-)

  23. Nasty, Not Naughty... by ytene · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is an incredibly shrewd move by Microsoft.

    All the millions of copies of pre-W10 Windows still in use are essentially "dead" to Microsoft: they are in fact an overhead, since MS have to continue to host all the patches and update materials for these releases, but can't generate revenue from them once the product is sold and installed. However, from a Microsoft perspective, W10 is the product that keeps on giving. It's incredibly intrusive SpyWareOS(TM) capabilities mean that the moment you have installed it, you become a Microsoft Product again. At any point in time they can send an update to your machine [because you can't turn off auto-update] that reverses any privacy settings you have made. They're not obliged to tell you that they have done it.

    In other Words, this move will prevent people from moving their personally-owned Windows 7/8/8.1 Licenses to newer hardware in the event of a hardware failure, so that, over time, those people will be forced to upgrade to SpyWareOS and become part of the Microsoft Product.

    Microsoft's defence against any potential future investigations by Monopoly/Market Abuse investigators will be: "It is unreasonable to expect us to continue to offer support for legacy software forever Additionally, we have not only made upgrading to Windows 10 incredibly simple, but we have actually made it free for all existing users for a considerable period of time. Lastly, anyone not happy can go buy a Mac..." And certainly, in most of the world, that will be enough.

    What this does is force anyone happy enough to run older Windows versions to upgrade, whether they like it or not. Or migrate. One thing that wasn't completely clear from either this post or the linked articles though: will the new CPU actually prevent say W7 from running at all? Will it's ID string be so alien that older versions of Windows simply won't recognise it and refuse to install? HP tried something like this by putting tiny ICs into their original toner cartridges, such that 3rd party cartridges would not work in their printers. That got overturned in court, though, because it was shown that the IC served no purpose other than to act as a barrier to entry. Could this be shown in a similar light? i.e. Could it be argued that some sneaky microcode work-around serves no purpose other than to enforce the hegemony?

    Anyone fluent in legalese lurking today?