I guess we have the people who clung to Windows XP to thank for that 😀

Also...

Of course the counterpoint to that is Windows 7 already runs smoothly on older hardware, so it doesn’t need any optimisation to run well on far more powerful chipsets.

If only it were that simple... People who tried running their Sound Blasters on some of the earliest dual CPU systems know first-hand that just being "newer" and "more powerful" doesn't guarantee that things just work.
It's not just about optimization.
Besides, where do they get the idea that hardware is backward-compatible? A lot of times it isn't. In fact, if it were, you wouldn't even need to bother with drivers in Windows.
But you do. CPUs include more and more peripheral hardware as well, including things like PCI-e controllers and such. Those will need drivers to work properly.

So does this mean I can no longer install legit copies of Windows 7 on my own system, or in a virtual machine?

DracoNihil wrote:

So does this mean I can no longer install legit copies of Windows 7 on my own system, or in a virtual machine?

As far as I understood it, it boils down to this:
If your CPU is of a certain future CPU type from Intel, AMD or Qualcomm (as listed in the article), then an installation of older versions of Windows is not supported by Microsoft.
It is not illegal, but if it doesn't work, you're on your own. You won't get help or updates from MS.

Is Microsoft really that desperate to sell Windows 10?

Anyway, "won't support" isn't synonymous with "won't allow", is it? While Microsoft would just ignore complaints from people like us, I imagine we wouldn't really be affected, since we're happy to install unsupported O/S like Windows 98 anyway, aren't we? I imagine --and hope-- there would be big backlash from business users, though.

I wonder what Microsoft thinks of people running MS-DOS 6.22 or Windows 98 SE on Core i7 Haswell's.

DracoNihil wrote:

So does this mean I can no longer install legit copies of Windows 7 on my own system, or in a virtual machine?

Of course you can. MS will simply not help you. Windows 7 already has issues being installed on some machines, and I guess MS simply does not want to address it (and prevent it from lasting as long as Windows XP).

DracoNihil wrote:

I wonder what Microsoft thinks of people running MS-DOS 6.22 or Windows 98 SE on Core i7 Haswell's.

If they wrote the law, perhaps we would be sent to gulags for refusing to comply with their "thou shalt upgrade" commandment. 😉

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Is Microsoft really that desperate to sell Windows 10?

Sell? You mean give away for free.
If you already have a Windows 7/8 license, you can get a free upgrade to Windows 10, which will work on your future CPU.
So if you wanted to install Windows 7/8 on new hardware, apparently you have such a license, and you are entitled to the free upgrade. Microsoft will not make any sales from this action.

I think the question is more: how desperate are people to cling to outdated OSes?
I think Microsoft's position is obvious: they don't want another Windows XP. They want to periodically upgrade their OS, and shorten the support term on older versions.
Which is more or less what other OS vendors have been doing anyway.

I interpret it as the same way Microsoft not "supporting" Pentium 4 in Windows 95. silly internet fud, how's an OS gonna turn off/on SSE5, AVX6000 or something?

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Is Microsoft really that desperate to sell Windows 10?

Anyway, "won't support" isn't synonymous with "won't allow", is it? While Microsoft would just ignore complaints from people like us, I imagine we wouldn't really be affected, since we're happy to install unsupported O/S like Windows 98 anyway, aren't we? I imagine --and hope-- there would be big backlash from business users, though.

It's like scali said. If it works then it works but if it doesn't, don't go to the Microsoft support forums expecting to find help or for there to be any patches released through automatic update to support the unsupported hardware. Whatever hardware is currently supported by 7 and 8 is all that will ever be supported by Microsoft.

Scali wrote:

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Is Microsoft really that desperate to sell Windows 10?

Sell? You mean give away for free.
If you already have a Windows 7/8 license, you can get a free upgrade to Windows 10

Only for a period of one year from the date when Windows 10 was officially released. After that, you have to pay.

leileilol wrote:

I interpret it as the same way Microsoft not "supporting" Pentium 4 in Windows 95. silly internet fud, how's an OS gonna turn off/on SSE5, AVX6000 or something?

There is actually some truth to that.
Namely, when SSE was introduced, new registers were added (there was probably a reason why they chose to map the MMX registers on the FPU registers).
In a multitasking OS, the entire CPU context has to be switched, which includes all registers. If the OS doesn't know about new registers, it will not preserve them during a switch.
The result is that on non-SSE-supporting OSes such as Windows 95, you can run a single task that uses SSE, because the SSE-context just happens to 'stick' between context switches. But as soon as you run two or more tasks with SSE, things break.
Same goes for AVX, where they changed the registers again.

So the OS does not necessarily turn things on/off, but for certain CPU extensions to work, the OS does have to be prepared for it.

sliderider wrote:

Only for a period of one year from the date when Windows 10 was officially released. After that, you have to pay.

Good thing MS is telling you now then, so you can upgrade your license right away!

i also interpret this as Microsoft wont WHQL certify new drivers for newer hardware, if such driver are proven to be works for older-than-win10 OS.

Scali wrote:

I think the question is more: how desperate are people to cling to outdated OSes?

Why upgrade OS when there's very little reason to do so? I'm still using Windows XP and Office 2003 for daily office works and internet, and I'm doing fine. I have no problem working together with people who are using DOCX or XLSX document format, since I have Office converter handy. The only instance where I need Office 2007 is when I had to review an Excel document with more than 255 columns. Fine, just fire up my very rarely used virtual machine which has Office 2007, and I'm good to go.

Eventually, it's a moot point, since people like me and most Vogoners don't have problems with unsupported OS anyway. What really interests me is how big businesses and average consumers would react to this strongarm tactics. Yes, technically, it may not as bad as it sounds, but it reeks strongarm and it doesn't exactly give Windows 10 good PR --especially considering Windows 10's previous track records, like this one.

So, I think I'm going to sit back and relax while enjoying the commotion caused by those who are pissed by Windows 10, and those who volunteer to vehemently defend it despite not getting any penny from Microsoft.

sliderider wrote:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2016/ … ef253c7eb917ef2

I've never used windows support. Only thing that matters is drivers.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Why upgrade OS when there's very little reason to do so?

But there is lots of reason to upgrade.
Firstly, there's the obvious point of new hardware, which is better supported by an OS that is actually designed around that hardware.
Secondly, upgrading the OS means you get the latest bugfixes and security features, and updates for any new bugs and security issues.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

What really interests me is how big businesses and average consumers would react to this strongarm tactics

I think they are in dire need of a push.
I am typing this on my brand new work laptop, which came with Windows 7...
My company is in no way prepared for Windows 10 support, or even 64-bit support, and we're in the business of developing software...
It's the same in most companies as far as I can tell. Most of them are still on Windows 7, and still develop 32-bit software mostly.

Scali wrote:

Firstly, there's the obvious point of new hardware, which is better supported by an OS that is actually designed around that hardware.

I think you're missing it, XP already does what Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wants to his satisfaction.

awgamer wrote:

I think you're missing it, XP already does what Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wants to his satisfaction.

I know that, but this topic is about new hardware, and Windows 7/8/10.
He says he runs XP on old hardware. As do I. Which is irrelevant to this topic.