Windows 7/8.1 updates blocked on Kaby Lake and Ryzen PCs

[Ttaskmaster]

Firstly it's not an established fact as you've so far failed to substantiate any of your claims, secondly the update for Bulldozer had nothing to do with stability issues as it was an update to the Windows scheduling that addressed performance issues.

Firstly, the very title of the thread is all about it. Pretty established...
Secondly, major updates to the scheduling and kernel are precisely what people are saying is why this hardware is unsupported.

So now you're arguing semantics, saying you've made an assumption is a claim is it not?

It is not, actually. It depends a lot on what is (or isn't) explicitly asserted and the contextual tone of persuasive intent (or lack thereof) behind the assertion.

So in other words despite you saying you didn't claim anything you're now explaining something that apparently you didn't claim, circular reasoning much?

In that instance, neither.
Adding detail to an assertion, that I further assert holds true regardless of the specifics around any given legal case.

No I'm saying i know better than you, and judging by your knowledge on the subject that's not saying much.

But still not enough to actually explain how the old OS is perfectly fine, so long as MS and AMD/Intel provide updates under obligations which may be unreasonable to expect or enforce...

I've made no assumptions other than your lack of understanding of the subject we're discussing,

You assume I'm looking at things from the same perspective as you, for starters... You're all about CPUs and why they can handle the older OS. I'm all about figuring out what in general would cause enough problems that MS cannot feasibly support it. I'm not even limiting myself to systems.

I'm still waiting for you to explain what's so different between Broadwell and Kaby Lake, i guess it's going to be a long wait as it seem not only can't you explain the differences but you're also moving the goal posts.

I have no idea of the differences beyond what the internet can offer.
I'm also looking at things from a larger perspective than a processor under a microscope, though and have never asserted otherwise. If you think that's moving the goalposts, that's your problem. I have always said Hardware because I know a PC is more than just a processor and there's more to supporting things than just what CPU someone has.

Not really, unless you're idea of humor is acting like a school kid.

Last time I checked, this was not a philosophical debate, so who cares?
But then I'd hate to "move the goalposts" and start bringing philosophical argument rules into something about laws and tech...

So you're admitting that there's not any issue with running newer hardware on older OS as all you need to do is fiddle around with some workarounds.

Workarounds which I've already said weren't exactly successful, yeah, sure... in the same way there's "not any issue" with exceeding lightspeed. Yup, no issue at all. 100% guaranteed possible and perfectly feasible in every conceivable theory... Enjoy.

[scaryjim]

... Because when i paid $119.99 for Windows 8 Microsoft told me they'd provide, among other things, design changes and feature requests until January 9, 2018. ...

Prove it.

... They didn't tell me that not only would they not provide design changes and feature requests to support newer hardware but that they'd also curtail the support i paid for by 6 years if i upgraded to newer hardware. ...

Prove it. Or rather, prove that they didn't reserve the right to change support details at their sole discretion.

... Not only that but when i bought my new Windows 10 PC Microsoft told me that i had full downgrade rights to both Windows 8.1 & 7, however i now find out that if i take them up on their promised downgrade right that I'm no longer going to be supported because my new PC has a Kaby Lake CPU, and that one over there has something called a Ryzen in it.

Irrelevant - you still have downgrade rights. You are more than welcome to downgrade your Windows 10 computer to Windows 8.1 or 7. You just won't get any updates, because it's not supported.

I understand your interpretation/understanding of the terms you signed up to, but unless you can prove that it is definitively what you signed up to beyond reasonable doubt, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court. The EULA doesn't back you up. The website that might have backed you up no longer exists. All the available evidence says that Microsoft is completely within its rights to alter the support terms unilaterally. And as updates are provided as part of the support arrangement, not as a right granted in the license of the software, that allows Microsoft to unilaterally change whether you're eligible to receive software updates or not.

MS said they wouldn't support Windows 7 and 8.1 running on Ryzen/Kaby Lake. Now people are getting upset because they installed Windows 7 or 8.1 on Ryzen or Kaby Lake and they're not getting support.

[Corky34]

Firstly, the very title of the thread is all about it. Pretty established...
Secondly, major updates to the scheduling and kernel are precisely what people are saying is why this hardware is unsupported.

I can only assume you either being deliberately obtuse or, once again, you're attempting to sow discord.

The part that isn't established is the topic we're discussing, that being your claim that an update could cause a possible conflicts and fritz an existing Win install, and secondly what part of Windows 8.1 being in mainstream support until January 9, 2018 during which time Microsoft said they'd issue design changes and feature requests, is it that you don't understand?

It is not, actually. It depends a lot on what is (or isn't) explicitly asserted and the contextual tone of persuasive intent (or lack thereof) behind the assertion.

In that instance, neither.
Adding detail to an assertion, that I further assert holds true regardless of the specifics around any given legal case.

Only it's not an assertion is it as an assertion is a confident and forceful statement of fact or belief and you've not provided any evidence to backup your statement of fact or belief, what you've done is make claim as you stated or asserted that something is the case without providing evidence or proof.

But still not enough to actually explain how the old OS is perfectly fine, so long as MS and AMD/Intel provide updates under obligations which may be unreasonable to expect or enforce...

You assume I'm looking at things from the same perspective as you, for starters... You're all about CPUs and why they can handle the older OS. I'm all about figuring out what in general would cause enough problems that MS cannot feasibly support it. I'm not even limiting myself to systems.

Windows 8.1 is still in mainstream support until January 9, 2018 during which time Microsoft said they'd issue design changes and feature requests, there's nothing unreasonable about it.

I have no idea of the differences beyond what the internet can offer.
I'm also looking at things from a larger perspective than a processor under a microscope, though and have never asserted otherwise. If you think that's moving the goalposts, that's your problem. I have always said Hardware because I know a PC is more than just a processor and there's more to supporting things than just what CPU someone has.

You mean your looking at a larger perspective than what Microsoft have stated, that it's the processor that isn't supported, like i said logical fallacies such as moving the goal posts just weakens your argument.

Also if you're not talking about processors then why did you post a link to an article talk about exactly that and why did you then go on to quote that article if you don't agree with it.

Last time I checked, this was not a philosophical debate, so who cares?
But then I'd hate to "move the goalposts" and start bringing philosophical argument rules into something about laws and tech...

What on earth does your inability to have a grownup discussion have to do with philosophy, or for that matter your profligate use of logical fallacies.

Workarounds which I've already said weren't exactly successful, yeah, sure... in the same way there's "not any issue" with exceeding lightspeed. Yup, no issue at all. 100% guaranteed possible and perfectly feasible in every conceivable theory... Enjoy.

Sorry but just because you say something doesn't make it true, if they're not successful then provide some evidence of that, on second thoughts, as it's pretty obvious you're trolling, maybe we should just agree to disagree.

@scaryjim, I would answer you but after attempting to hold a reasonable discussion with Ttaskmaster it's probably for the best that i give it sometime for his trolling effect wear off.

[Ttaskmaster]

I can only assume you either being deliberately obtuse or, once again, you're attempting to sow discord.

You know what they say about assuming things, right?

The part that isn't established is the topic we're discussing, that being your claim that an update could cause a possible conflicts and fritz an existing Win install,

Assumption, not claim.
Assumed, by the way, from reading Microsoft own statements and lifecycle FAQs about how you need Win10 to avoid known and possible security risks, compliance risks, stability issues, vulnerabilities, as well as manufacturers themselves saying their chipsets won't work with Win7 and refusing to support the drivers. That combined with other external factors and that Microsoft previously already said Skylake would also not be supported, for the same reasons, before relenting and finally putting in enough work to bring 7 up to scratch for those comparatively few companies still doddering along on it (my own included, which says a lot about why we're bottom of the industry tables), all makes for a fairly convincing case.

and secondly what part of Windows 8.1 being in mainstream support until January 9, 2018 during which time Microsoft said they'd issue design changes and feature requests, is it that you don't understand?

The part where things like manufacturers' hardware changes may make such support problematic, if not impossible, yet people still expect such a thing to be delivered...

Only it's not an assertion is it as an assertion is a confident and forceful statement of fact or belief and you've not provided any evidence to backup your statement of fact or belief, what you've done is make claim as you stated or asserted that something is the case without providing evidence or proof.

Assertion
noun
1. a positive statement or declaration, often without support or reason:
2. an act of asserting.

Belief
noun
An acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

Windows 8.1 is still in mainstream support until January 9, 2018 during which time Microsoft said they'd issue design changes and feature requests, there's nothing unreasonable about it.

Unless another factor prevents them from doing so and/or is beyond the scope of MS's obligations under that support.

You mean your looking at a larger perspective than what Microsoft have stated, that it's the processor that isn't supported, like i said logical fallacies such as moving the goal posts just weakens your argument.

That is one factor Microsoft have mentioned. But to assume that is the only factor, especially since Microsoft themselves have mentioned others that go with it, would be a logical fallacy... or perhaps in your case a fallacy fallacy. The fact that you would try to argue back with formal and informal fallcies suggests a lack of substance to your own argument, which I assume arises from your unwillingness to consider the argument from the opposite perspective in the first place.

Also if you're not talking about processors then why did you post a link to an article talk about exactly that and why did you then go on to quote that article if you don't agree with it.

Err... It did go beyond just the CPU, you know...

What on earth does your inability to have a grownup discussion have to do with philosophy, or for that matter your profligate use of logical fallacies.

About as much as your own intentionality fallacies and inability to afford challenges appropriate consideration and appreciation, while misdeclaring a moving of goalposts in an oberabundance of verbosity, misaccusation of straw man while levying the very same your own self, fallacy of composition.... oh, and a garnish of ignoratio elenchi just for flavour. I won't even bother with the main course, as I'm sure you get the idea.

Sorry but just because you say something doesn't make it true

Really?
Does it not?

, if they're not successful then provide some evidence of that, on second thoughts, as it's pretty obvious you're trolling, maybe we should just agree to disagree.

Actually I'm just being facetious and adding a touch of sarcasm, no trolling intended, but never mind.
But if you're feeling trolled up nonetheless, then once you've calmed down and carried on you could always start here, though: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11182/...-windows-7-x64

after attempting to hold a reasonable discussion with Ttaskmaster it's probably for the best that i give it sometime for his trolling effect wear off.

Y?
U mad bro?

Now ^that might have been trolling... as far as I care to try, anyway.

[Saracen]

Okay, you two. Enough is enough.

Please either continue respectfully, or don't continue. But enough with the snarkiness.

[peterb]

You know what they say about assuming things, right?

Assumption, not claim.

As you said - you know what they say about assuming things

However - as Saracen has said - debate the subject and keep personalities out of it.