That there is a 40% marketshare of windows 7 users. Look i dont want / need Windows 10 for a matter of good reasons. I dont like the idea either that an update in any way can be 'forced' to your computer thus many times, resetting preferences after installation of that update. There are many cases where microsoft did a very terrible job. And i'm sure that many as well can confirm the above, since i've fixed a few PC's as well who lost ALL their data after a forced Windows 10 upgrade (in the very beginning you simply had no choice).
I dont believe that the chipset nor platform will not function on Windows 7. There are a tiny set of features on the CPU that are new and might not be supported. But the CPU should in theory, still function as a 8350 or intel equivalent. There are alot of businesses who still operate on Windows 7, XP and many ATM's still on 2000 or even Windows NT. I know some company's who do their logistics on systems that carry MS-dos 5.0 with a ROM thats indestructible basicly.
It is the new features that come with Ryzen that might not be supported. It's not a big deal if you ask me. As long as the CPU works identical to a i7 or 8350 it's alright.
Well that's interesting in itself. Look at Windows 10 x86: mirrors Windows 7 (+ BIOS but that isn't supposed to be ran from Windows anyway). Ryzen only supporting 64-bit versions of Windows? If so, I applaud that decision.
Been hearing lots of people saying how better it was over Win8 because they brought back the start menu in Win10 well it still look ugly as f**'in Win8 & what start menu? very , very confusing...
Tried it for 3 weeks & I don't like it at all even removing a few things like cortana & some apps , etc... still looks Fugly as hell
I much prefer Win7 but I hardly use it anymore (Dual boot) I'm meanly using Linux Mint 98% of the time even with games (although I don't play much games anymore it still play fine under Linux)
Linux as come a long way for the past few years & Wine is much better too & not to forget about Vulkan...
So I don't care much about no drivers for Win7 as long as it will function in Linux I'll be just fine
There is a lot to go through in your post, so I'm going to break it down. The current market share of Windows 7 doesn't matter one bit. What matters is the percentage of NEW computers being sold with Windows 7, and that number is nothing relative to the number sold with Windows 10.
I dont like the idea either that an update in any way can be 'forced' to your computer thus many times, resetting preferences after installation of that update. There are many cases where microsoft did a very terrible job. And i'm sure that many as well can confirm the above
You never had no choice, Windows 10 was never a forced update. Just because people failed to read and act properly when presented with the Windows 10 upgrade prompts doesn't mean the update was forced. And, if anything, the update was harder to avoid towards the end than the beginning. In the beginning it was easy and clear how to avoid the upgrade. At the end, just closing the prompt was considered agreeing to the upgrade, you actually had to select the option to decline. This was in the fine print, but people failed to read and just closed the window. Again, this doesn't mean the upgrade was forced, it means people didn't read.
I dont believe that the chipset nor platform will not function on Windows 7. There are a tiny set of features on the CPU that are new and might not be supported. But the CPU should in theory, still function as a 8350 or intel equivalent.
Then you don't understand how drivers and hardware work. Even hardware that is similar to old usually won't just work with the old driver. CPUs and chipsets are no different. What you are saying is the same as saying I should be able to use the original drivers for the 9800GT on my brand new GTX1080. They're both nVidia GPUs, so why even bother updating the drivers, right?
Any business still running XP needs to go out of business. And there really aren't that many ATMs running that outdated of software, but if they are, do you think they'll have the latest Kaby Lake or Ryzen processor. Again, you're back to arguing about old machines running old OSes. You think banks are going to buy brand new ATMs with the latest processors in them, but throw Windows NT on them? The new ATMs aren't running old OSes.
Dutch goverment is actually paying, microsoft in order to continue, updates on Microsoft windows XP. This is happening in more countries since their infrastructure is not ready for any newer OS.
You ignore the fact that alot of people lost their data due to the (forced, unwillingly, however you want call it) update from 7 / 8 to Windows 10. Nobody is going to read a 50 page TOS and simply hit Update because they dont know what that update is actually doing. MS settled for over $10.000 with one female in particular where her system basicly got destroyed after an update. THAT is what bothers me. There are numerous occasions as well where an update of Windows 10 crashed alot of people's their computer. Turning off updates is'nt the sollution. MS is not roughly testing out combinations of their updates that they are pushing through.
You may say Windows 7 is not being sold to computers, but the majority who buys computers that are already assembled with some HP / Asus or any other brand proberly does not even know that you CAN revert back to 7 or 8. I always build my own computers and select the OS that is required for it's purpose. Hell i cant even get used to the new W10 start-menu and the way things are unorganised.
Being used to things is'nt bad. Forcing a complete new GUI is a different league. That new GUI is coming with the new W10 update very soon.
Sorry, W7 X64 is being supported up to 2020 which is 3.5 years from now on, and by this very day it's still a suitable os for me. The only advantage (DX12) is not great enough to make the switch yet. My RX480 performs perfectly fine on Windows 7.
And tell me, do we really need to have new features (CPU registers) that come with the new Ryzen CPU? I'm pretty sure that we wont note the performance impact on SPECIFIC applications who make use of those 'new' registers. I bet you that the AM4 / Ryzen platform will work on Windows 7 X64.
Personally such choices and the way some OS'es are not being supported is to push the masses towards W10. I dont like that strategy from a huge co-operate who is deciding for you and me the choices you make on your computer daily, and change that if they want to.
Dutch goverment is actually paying, microsoft in order to continue, updates on Microsoft windows XP. This is happening in more countries since their infrastructure is not ready for any newer OS.
And that will be coming to an end at the end of this year when Microsoft discontinues the paid extended support of XP. If they can't get their shit together by now, let the government fall, because if they can't manage the transition to a modern OS in the time given to them, they are a failure of a government.
You ignore the fact that alot of people lost their data due to the (forced, unwillingly, however you want call it) update from 7 / 8 to Windows 10. Nobody is going to read a 50 page TOS and simply hit Update because they dont know what that update is actually doing. MS settled for over $10.000 with one female in particular where her system basicly got destroyed after an update. THAT is what bothers me. There are numerous occasions as well where an update of Windows 10 crashed alot of people's their computer. Turning off updates is'nt the sollution. MS is not roughly testing out combinations of their updates that they are pushing through.
I'm not ignoring it, I'm saying it has no place in this discussion. The small number of issues when upgrading from Windows 7/8 to 10 don't apply to a new computer. The fact that people are still running older versions of Windows doesn't apply to buying a new computer. Both things don't matter to this discussion.
You may say Windows 7 is not being sold to computers, but the majority who buys computers that are already assembled with some HP / Asus or any other brand proberly does not even know that you CAN revert back to 7 or 8. I always build my own computers and select the OS that is required for it's purpose. Hell i cant even get used to the new W10 start-menu and the way things are unorganised.
Actually, most people that buy computers CAN'T revert back to 7 or 8. The large majority of computers are sold with Windows 10, not Windows 10 Professional. The standard Windows 10 does not allow downgrades.
And people who build their own computers are enthusiasts, and we all know the enthusiast market doesn't even show up on the radar of these companies because it is so small.
If you don't like the start menu, replace it. It really isn't that big of a deal.
For someone that says they don't use it, you sure do seem to think you know a lot about it. There have been several GUI tweaks as Windows 10 has been updated, but there is no plans for any major GUI update.
Sorry, W7 X64 is being supported up to 2020 which is 3.5 years from now on, and by this very day it's still a suitable os for me. The only advantage (DX12) is not great enough to make the switch yet. My RX480 performs perfectly fine on Windows 7.
Like I said, then keep using it. But if you insist on using outdated software, expect to be forced to use outdated hardware. Don't get pissed when the hardware manufacturers refused to support it anymore. It doesn't make financial sense to keep developing drivers for Windows 7 anymore. Intel and AMD have both come to that conclusion.
And tell me, do we really need to have new features (CPU registers) that come with the new Ryzen CPU? I'm pretty sure that we wont note the performance impact on SPECIFIC applications who make use of those 'new' registers. I bet you that the AM4 / Ryzen platform will work on Windows 7 X64.
It isn't just registers. They've been touting the new security features of Ryzen, and Intel has been doing the same with Kaby Lake. There is a lot built into a CPU now, and if the OS doesn't know how to communicate with all the parts of a CPU, bad things happen. Hell, I remember when the NX bit was introduced. When it came over to the desktop processors in the Pentium 4/Athlon 64 era, it caused all kinds of havoc. Anyone running anything older than XP SP2(when NX Bit support was added to Windows) experienced all sorts of problems from software crashing, to software not even launching, to hard locks of the computer. Trying to get older OSes running stable on these processor was pretty much impossible.
Do we need these features? In todays world, I'd say yes. Security features are necessary.
Personally such choices and the way some OS'es are not being supported is to push the masses towards W10. I dont like that strategy from a huge co-operate who is deciding for you and me the choices you make on your computer daily, and change that if they want to.
You can believe it is a big conspiracy if you want. But me, no, I believe the far more logical idea that Intel and AMD simply don't want to spend the money supporting OSes that aren't likely to be used with their new products anyway.
..... The fact that people are still running older versions of Windows doesn't apply to buying a new computer. Both things don't matter to this discussion.
So... you can only get the Ryzen processor on a new PC? Because I thought this discussion was about the processor, not just pre-made PCs with the AMD Ryzens... hell most of us here haven't bought a "ready made" PC in years, unless for a friend/relative (a decision which I fully support, because "Warranty"!!!).
ding ding ding!!! we have a winner!!! This is the point most are trying to make here. It's all about the money. If people keep using the same software on the newer hardware, how is M$ going to keep making money?
Planned obsolescence. At least they put it on a web page so you can see when your new car computer will die not make them money any longer. Windows 7 would still work fine, if they wanted to keep supporting it, but then their ability to make money would be cramped.
Let me quote the write-up here (bold emphasis mine). "According to AMD's Memory Encryption Whitepaper, SME works by leveraging the Secure Processor in encrypting data (using a 128-bit AES encryption key) when it is written to DRAM, effectively putting an end to the last redoubt of Cleartext-stored data. This becomes increasingly important when one considers the advent of NVDIMM (non volatile memory), which if left unencrypted, would be much more vulnerable to physical removal and subsequent cloning of its contents than currently employed solutions. This encryption key is randomly generated by the Secure Processor on each system reset, and is never accessible by any software running on the CPU cores."
So, this process can't be written without having a back door into it, or else the government would never install them in their equipment. Any door can be opened by someone other than the intended user. Therefore, the only improvement here, is that it will take foreign powers some extended time to find the door. And then we're back where we started.
Per Symantec, "In 2015, the number of zero-day vulnerabilities discovered more than doubled to 54, a 125 percent increase from the year before. Or put another way, a new zero-day vulnerability was found every week (on average) in 2015. "
The "improvements" in hardware and software security only mean that it's another bullet point on the Powerpoint of "Why you need the Next Best Thing!". It appears to have little to no effect on the amount of security incursions on every days users.
Percent of all US households that have been affected by viruses: 40 %
Sources: Microsoft Security Intelligence Report, Panda Security, Consumer Reports
Content Author: Statistic Brain
Date research was conducted: September 3, 2016
Maybe this just means we're losing the battle, and it certainly doesn't mean "Stop developing, because 'Viruses!!' " However, I have about a 5% confidence that the new functionalities built into the new processors couldn't be supported on Windows 7. They're not supported because AMD and Intel choose not to. Which again, brings us back to "money".
You can believe it is a big conspiracy if you want. But me, no, I believe the far more logical idea that Intel and AMD simply don't want to spend the money supporting OSes that aren't likely to be used with their new products anyway.
I can't argue with this in the least. If M$ tells companies, "We're moving to a new OS, and aren't going to support the older OSes", then neither AMD nor Intel will want to design their products to support the older OSes. If the company that makes the majority share of end-user software tells you they're not going to support old software, you either accept that and move with them, or you die as a company. It's simple. It's the American Way. It's business. It's the same way manufacturing commerce has worked for decades here, and I assume centuries in the world. If I, as a business, want to keep you coming back as a customer, I have to find that sweet spot between "blatant planned obsolescence", and "reliable product". I need to make you believe that my product is going to last you a "Long Time", and then figure out what period of time you will accept as "Long Enough", and hit that number. Otherwise, I'm a one-shot sale, and I go out of business.
That doesn't mean that I, the consumer, appreciates blatant planned obsolescence. That is exactly what this is.
For someone that says they don't use it, you sure do seem to think you know a lot about it. There have been several GUI tweaks as Windows 10 has been updated, but there is no plans for any major GUI update.
So... you can only get the Ryzen processor on a new PC? Because I thought this discussion was about the processor, not just pre-made PCs with the AMD Ryzens... hell most of us here haven't bought a "ready made" PC in years, unless for a friend/relative (a decision which I fully support, because "Warranty"!!!).
ding ding ding!!! we have a winner!!! This is the point most are trying to make here. It's all about the money. If people keep using the same software on the newer hardware, how is M$ going to keep making money?
Planned obsolescence. At least they put it on a web page so you can see when your new car computer will die not make them money any longer. Windows 7 would still work fine, if they wanted to keep supporting it, but then their ability to make money would be cramped.
This has nothing to do with Microsoft. People keep trying to say this involves Microsoft. It doesn't. Stop trying to make a conspiracy when there isn't one. AMD and Intel don't want to waste money developing and supporting drivers for old OSes that almost no one is going to use with their new products. It is that simple. Microsoft has no influence on this decision.
Maybe this just means we're losing the battle, and it certainly doesn't mean "Stop developing, because 'Viruses!!' " However, I have about a 5% confidence that the new functionalities built into the new processors couldn't be supported on Windows 7. They're not supported because AMD and Intel choose not to. Which again, brings us back to "money".
All of this is exactly why we need hardware level security features.
I have no doubt that these security features could be supported by Windows 7. I also have completely confidence that Intel and AMD would never see a positive return on the investment they would have to put forth to get them working and keeping them working. And you are right, the money is the point. Intel and AMD have decided supporting Windows 7 isn't worth the cost, they obviously have crunched the numbers and figured out they aren't making money supporting Windows 7, they are losing money, so they have both decided to stop doing it. That is how businesses stay in business. If something isn't making you money, you stop doing it.
I can't argue with this in the least. If M$ tells companies, "We're moving to a new OS, and aren't going to support the older OSes", then neither AMD nor Intel will want to design their products to support the older OSes. If the company that makes the majority share of end-user software tells you they're not going to support old software, you either accept that and move with them, or you die as a company. It's simple. It's the American Way. It's business. It's the same way manufacturing commerce has worked for decades here, and I assume centuries in the world. If I, as a business, want to keep you coming back as a customer, I have to find that sweet spot between "blatant planned obsolescence", and "reliable product". I need to make you believe that my product is going to last you a "Long Time", and then figure out what period of time you will accept as "Long Enough", and hit that number. Otherwise, I'm a one-shot sale, and I go out of business.
That doesn't mean that I, the consumer, appreciates blatant planned obsolescence. That is exactly what this is.
Except Microsoft hasn't done that. They are still supporting Windows 7 and 8.1 for years to come. The issue comes down to the fact that almost no one is using older OSes on new systems.
This has nothing to do with Microsoft. People keep trying to say this involves Microsoft. It doesn't. Stop trying to make a conspiracy when there isn't one. AMD and Intel don't want to waste money developing and supporting drivers for old OSes that almost no one is going to use with their new products. It is that simple. Microsoft has no influence on this decision.
B.
Except Microsoft hasn't done that. They are still supporting Windows 7 and 8.1 for years to come. The issue comes down to the fact that almost no one is using older OSes on new systems.
We're just going to have to disagree on A. I firmly believe that M$ told AMD and Intel something to the effect of "We are pushing forward hard with Windows 10, and want to push Windows 7 systems off of the circuit. Plan accordingly. " They then took that to heart. All three companies have been found guilty of "shady practices" when it comes to monopolizing their services. I have little doubt that many more closed-door deals go on that are not brought to light. Do I believe that M$ encouraged AMD and Intel to take these steps? Absolutely.
For point B, all I can point to is "Planned Obsolescence". M$ doesn't want people to stay on an older platform, since that doesn't make them enough money. Like I said, I understand a business needs to make money. I just don't like Blatant planned obsolescence.
Fine.
Better (faster) than Win 10, IMO.
The tricky part is installing it, unless you use optical media (due the lack of USB drivers in the media).
Naturally you can include the USB drivers to the images using DISM for example.
I've used Win 7 about 95% of the time on Ryzen.
Only the actual performance evaluation was done with Win 10, as it wasn't up to me.
The performance differences are minor, but very constant regardless (in favor of Win 7).
MajinCry said: ↑
Would you be able to run that draw call benchmark in Win7, with a couple other tweaks?
Apparently there's been motherboard BIOS updates that have improved performance (faster DDR4 speeds), as well as disabling SMT also giving better performance. Would be good to see if there's a cumulative effect that boosts the draw call perf.
Look at Windows 10 x86: mirrors Windows 7 (+ BIOS but that isn't supposed to be ran from Windows anyway). Ryzen only supporting 64-bit versions of Windows? If so, I applaud that decision.
