Windows 7 Entering Extended Support in January 2015

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is this mean MS will stop making service pack for Windows 7? Because now it is pretty ridiculous that after finish install a fresh Windows 7 w/ SP1, there are at least 160+ updates need to apply. Even that POS Vista had 2 service packs released. Remember this Windows 7 will keep having fix until 2020!! It looks like M$ do this (by not releasing newer service pack) to annoy you upgrade to newer windows.
Click to expand...

My hope is that Microsoft releases "Service Pack 2" that will include all of the security updates since SP1. It doesn't have to have any new features - just consider it a roll-up service pack.
 
I have 3 machines running Windows 8, I will soon be upgrading 1 to 8.1 (tried in the past but it failed miserably). Windows 8 has its flaws (some are horrible) however the criticisms with 8 have been primarily formed by people who don't use it. At any rate, I just upgraded my folks from Windows XP to windows 7. They are not interested in new features. So long as the security updates keep coming they are good.
 
I think this is pretty irrelevant, for the most part. New features were never really going to be added - well, in another year it'll be official. The people who bought Windows 7 machines that still have them have no real incentive to upgrade, and the people that went from Vista to 8 or 8.1 obviously don't care.

I suspect I'll be using 7 for a good many years yet, unless the games I want to play don't support it. Doesn't seem likely for a great while.
 
Well I know Windows 7 is also the last OS that supports the similar "Windows 2000" UI setup and "Classic Skin" which is something I want to use, and I am sure others would want and even the XP UI Skin also is what most want to see too, I know many may try to give me Negative Votes on that because I don't support Steve Balmer's "Freedom of Touch" idea of Windows 8 as Required by him, Windows 9 needs to very well keep the "Classic" and "XP" skins because it feels more like Old School.
 
Needing an account at the MS store just to install a service pack? I can live without that. Needing an account at the MS store to play Solitaire? I can live without that. Needing to turn off and uninstall a mess of blinky Metro "apps" to banish useless bandwidth wasters? I can live without that.
Click to expand...

This is a huge part of the issue, but it seems the proponents of Win8 ignore that or believe it's a cost of doing business. When did an OS stop being the basic software that gets your hardware running and which then allowed you to customize it from there? Remember when Windows setup actually had customization options other than which drive to install to? Maybe i am too old?
 
Tell that to my 50 customers who bought windows 8 machines only after a week after looking at videos and reading books just to use windows 8 "GET THAT THING OFF MY MACHINE! I HATE IT!" they all said same thing.
I sold a whole 4 windows 8 , 300 of windows 7, i make more money removing windows 8 and downgrading to windows 7.
I have 30 business clients all they will buy is windows 7 laptops and desktops not one single company i have would use windows 8 some tried it and was not compatible with custom software they were using.
I even have customers that bought windows 8 computers from other big box stores drop by after a month and downgrade windows 8 to windows 7.
Failure rate on windows 8 to upgrade 8.1 is huge i have new customers show up with machines that no longer boot after upgrading window 8 to 8.1.
The fact that Microsoft has made a patch to fix windows 8 to 8.1 months after shows that they dropped the ball on proper testing.
I think because Microsoft has no competition they are becoming lazy and what "Features" are they taking about Microsoft not putting in windows 7 in this article there has been no new features in windows 7 since release??.
Click to expand...

This sounds exactly like what happened with my customers in 1995, and in 2002, with the change from 3.1 to Win95 and then from Win98 to WinXP

 
The wonderful world of Win8.1+ & Win9: Write something on your computer that MS or "the guv" finds unacceptable, and they brick your system. By 2020, I'd expect most computers may return to integrated CPU's + ram (much like how mobile devices are) - so now you're down the entire cost of your computer.
With a locked, pristine drive available for analysis when 'men in suits' arrive, all you can do is wait, and yearn for the days of Win95 with no internet.
 
I think a lot of people, or at least most of the people in this thread, are forgetting about one very crucial feature that won't be supported in Windows 7 because of this...

Hint, graphics API. If this is Microsoft's idea of supporting desktop users and gamers, and providing 'upgrade incentives' to Windows 9, then I'm genuinely outraged. There's no reason Windows 7 shouldn't be capable of supporting DX12, and it's been shown time and again (Vista and DX10 are prime examples) that intentionally segmenting the PC platform by developing exclusive APIs doesn't make people want to upgrade to a new OS. It just makes people dislike the API, the new OS, and your company even more... Microsoft.

Honestly not sure how this got past the community on Tom's. It's usually totally single minded, gaming centric tunnel vision here.
 


DX12 Crucial? Doubtful, software developers haven't even used the full capability of DX11 yet. Plus DX12 is a good distance in the future. Many haven't discounted Windows 9, I haven't, I am waiting for a reason to upgrade from 7. Windows 8 is an unmitigated disaster. MS was told over and over, before the release that there were interface issues on the desktop and other non-touch devices and MS decided to pull an apple and ignore it. This flop is of MS's own making and Windows 9 has to be dang good to reverse it. The ball is in their court and lets hope they don't drop it again.
 

How have game developers not fully utilized DX11 yet? I'm honestly just not sure what you mean by that. DX11 hardware has practically saturated the market, and because of its wide adoption game developers have been targeting DX11 for a while now. Are you talking about feature level on a game to game basis?


Is it coming before 2020? Cause that's when Windows 7 'support' ends.



Are you suggesting that DX12 should be an exclusive feature, and used to incentivize users to upgrade? Or do you just not care about DX12? The first part of your comment makes it sound like you just don't care about it very much, but this second part sounds almost like you want it to be a new and exclusive feature to give you more reasons to upgrade. If you just don't care, then I would simply say okay, there's not much more to argue about. I'm not sure why an enthusiast/gamer wouldn't care about having the broadest possible support for something like that, but okay.

I mean think about what you just said about DX11, because I would totally agree that it took game developers way longer to move beyond DX9 than it should've, but it really just all comes down to support and adoption, and I think Vista and DX10 exclusivity had a lot to do with the delay. Like I said in my previous comment, the way to support PC gaming is to have a large platform of users for game developers to target. That's when you see adoption and support (i.e. progress), and that's when you see game developers take advantage of the "full capability" of an API. Windows 7 has 50% market share, 49% on Steam. Forcing people to upgrade to a new OS to take advantage of an API that's otherwise fully supported by their existing hardware is bullshit.
 
@Dragonsqrrl - The hardware is everywhere but most games are DX9 with some DX11 sprinkled in, this is starting to change but DX11 is still only starting to become common. If DX12 is exclusive to Windows 9, then I expect it to be a slower adoption than 11 has been. On the flip side of that is that DX12 is supposed to be a "lower level" API, similar to Mantle, and that might lead developers to adopt quicker, but again, if exclusive, I don't see that happening.

I have never purchased an OS due to a newer API and this would only become a consideration for purchase is developers were keeping up with the latest API as opposed to what has the largest marketshare. So at this point, I don't care about DX12. And what I meant by being a good distance off, I mean that by the time DX12 comes out we will have Windows 9 and we will have had plenty of time to either move to it or reject it. By the time Windows 7 hits EoL, we will like have Windows 10 coming and if 9 flops, 10 might be a gem.

Vista and DX10 is a perfect example of why an API shouldn't be exclusive, no one that I know of, bought Vista for DX10 and I doubt anyone thought much of DX11 when getting 7, early on. Developers make programs for the largest user base to increase sales, so making DX12 exclusive to Windows 9 would be backwards.

DX12 exclusivity would be shooting themselves in the foot, but MS has done it before...
 
I am sick of Microsoft pushing it's new OS down peoples throats, We love XP and like Win 7, we have taken months, even years to customize our settings, programs and appearance to our liking. Microsoft has always had terrible customer service unless you have a credit card. First they start issuing buggy updates that mess with our computers, then they discontinue support for them, all to make a buck and force us to get their latest and greatest OS. I refuse to get Win 8, and they still cannot find a way to transfer our programs and settings over during an upgrade. I think it may be time to consider getting Linux or another non Microsoft OS permanently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom