Windows 7/8.1 EOL



  • My boss forwarded me this email yesterday that he received from our vendor:

    As you may have heard, Microsoft and Intel released some news a few weeks back regarding their systems and what they will be continually supporting. Here are the bullet points on what you need to know (if you don't already):

    What? Effective July 17, 2017, Microsoft will no longer support Windows 7/8.1 and older operating systems on current and future processors, graphics cards, and more.

    So what? As of July 17, 2017, if your organization is still running Windows 7 or 8.1 on a 6th generation or newer Intel processor, you will no longer receive regular security patches and support. After the deadline, all Intel Skylake and subsequent PCs will require Windows 10 in order to get support from Microsoft. Continuing to run Windows 8 and older will leave you vulnerable to malware, hacks, compatibility issues, and more.

    What now? If you need to purchase new machines in 2016 with Win 7 or Win 8, then Intel Gen 4 and 5 processors will be your only option. Availability is limited on these older processor machines. Clients are already moving Q3 and Q4 system orders and projects up early to ensure they have the support they need. I would encourage you to review the links below and determine if you should pursue PC purchases before Intel Gen 4 and 5 processors are no longer available, or determine if Windows 10 is a direction your organization is ready to embrace.

    https://pcconnection.savoinspire.com/files/340056-Windows-10-6th-Gen-Flyer.pdf

    http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/01/skylake-users-given-18-months-to-upgrade-to-windows-10/

    http://go.connect.pcconnection.com/e/44372/g7f6l--id-3uxo74/6hdykg/517729185

    The Future of Windows and You
    On January 15, 2016, Microsoft made a major announcement regarding how they will support the Windows Operating System moving forward. In case you didn't see it, Microsoft will only be supporting Windows 10 as the OS on all 6th Generation Intel® Core™ (Skylake) processors and later systems.
    Watch our video and read the blog to learn more about this Windows 10 support announcement, and how it could impact your PC refresh plans.

    I know that this is a lot of information to digest, so please give me a call if you have any questions. Bottom line - if your company has any software that is incompatible to Windows 10 and you don't foresee yourself moving over to 10 by July 2017 - we should talk.



  • Wow - this is a load of lies.. lol

    MS will be releasing security updates through Windows 7's EOL in 2020, and the same for Windows 8.1 in 2023.

    MS won't be releasing fixes to problems discovered in compatibility of those systems with Skylake or newer systems after the 2017 date - fine, but that doesn't mean you'll suddenly stop getting security updates.



  • I see this as a ruse to get people into a buying mode now, and not to wait until their current systems fail.

    The PC industry blamed Microsoft's giving away of Windows 10 on their bad sales in Q4 2015. I think this press release is just MS's way to say one thing, have it read as another, and appease the PC makers.



  • I'm honestly curious how long after a chipset/processor is released is MS still making tweaks/updates to the code to offer support in the OS? 6 months? a year?

    From a hardware support perspective, MS should not be worrying about Skylake at all by the time the deadline rolls around.

    This is like worrying about MS still adding support for Core Gen 2 processors today - it's a non issue.



  • It's our vendor who sells us PCs. So they are trying to get everyone to order PCs in a panic. Very shady tactics...


  • Service Provider

    @IRJ said:

    It's our vendor who sells us PCs. So they are trying to get everyone to order PCs in a panic. Very shady tactics...

    I think that they'd be called an ex-vendor if they pulled that here 🙂



  • This is actually correct. Microsoft isn't going to be patching OS's older than 10 on the newest processors.





  • @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?



  • @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.



  • @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?



  • @IRJ said:

    I know that this is a lot of information to digest, so please give me a call if you have any questions. Bottom line - if your company has any software that is incompatible to Windows 10 and you don't foresee yourself moving over to 10 by July 2017 - we should talk.

    @Dashrender . Especially this last line.



  • @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.



  • @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.

    I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.



  • @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.

    I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.

    It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...



  • @Kelly said:

    @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.

    I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.

    It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...

    It seems like a push to get users to upgrade faster IMO. Another way of putting it is, "We're Microsoft and we do what we want. Screw you and you have no choice, but to grovel at our feet and meet our demands."


  • Service Provider

    @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.

    I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.

    It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...

    It seems like a push to get users to upgrade faster IMO. Another way of putting it is, "We're Microsoft and we do what we want. Screw you and you have no choice, but to grovel at our feet and meet our demands."

    Well, I will agree with the need to kick people in the ass to upgrade systems and not sit on the same thing for 15 years like XP. There are a LOT of Windows 7 users planning on it.


  • Service Provider

    Maybe I am missing something but it doesn't seem odd at all to me. It sounds like they are not doing extra development to support new installs of old OSes on new hardware. I prefer that they do not, in fact, as it would be wasted development effort for systems that should not exist. I don't want the cost of Windows to go up to support people who want their no longer current systems to be being actively updated for new hardware.



  • @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.

    I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.

    It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...

    It seems like a push to get users to upgrade faster IMO. Another way of putting it is, "We're Microsoft and we do what we want. Screw you and you have no choice, but to grovel at our feet and meet our demands."

    If that is the case, it seems very shortsighted of them. Their marketshare is getting encroached on from all sides.


  • Service Provider

    @IRJ said:

    It seems like a push to get users to upgrade faster IMO. Another way of putting it is, "We're Microsoft and we do what we want. Screw you and you have no choice, but to grovel at our feet and meet our demands."

    That seems a bit drastic. I don't feel this way even slightly and I don't like Windows enough to run it. Supporting new hardware takes time and money and if it doesn't make sense, why would they commit to it? Software development is expensive.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    Maybe I am missing something but it doesn't seem odd at all to me. It sounds like they are not doing extra development to support new installs of old OSes on new hardware. I prefer that they do not, in fact, as it would be wasted development effort for systems that should not exist. I don't want the cost of Windows to go up to support people who want their no longer current systems to be being actively updated for new hardware.

    I disagree. The cost to maintain an OS is much less than the cost of making all the software vendors keep up. The prices for other software will go up as the development demands increase.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    Maybe I am missing something but it doesn't seem odd at all to me. It sounds like they are not doing extra development to support new installs of old OSes on new hardware. I prefer that they do not, in fact, as it would be wasted development effort for systems that should not exist. I don't want the cost of Windows to go up to support people who want their no longer current systems to be being actively updated for new hardware.

    They're doing the work for old hardware. Speaking with a level of ignorance here, but it doesn't seem that hard to do best effort for the newest hardware unless there are some revolutionary changes to hardware and architecture coming.


  • Service Provider

    @Kelly said:

    @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @IRJ said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    @Dashrender said:

    @Kelly said:

    https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle#Supporting-the-latest-processor

    So what though?

    Assuming that the predecessor for Skylake comes out before July 2017, then MS should release support for it as well, though it's possible they won't. You'll have all the support you need for Skylake long before the 2017 deadline.

    It's not like on the deadline they are going to roll out a patch that removes the support they have already created.

    Skylake won't be getting any development at all from Intel, let alone MS, for over a year before this deadline. Heck, is Intel doing any development now with regards to Skylake? It's already made, being sold. It's in the pipe. I suppose they could make more chips different speeds based on the tech, and while doing so add in more features - but can they really? Would it be Skylake anymore if they add new features not already listed as part of Skylake?

    I'm stating that the vendor isn't stating anything incorrect. They're not lying. This is what Microsoft is actually stating. In effect Microsoft is stating that they will not release security patches for non Win10 versions that are running on the listed processors. Yes, your computer will not cease working, but you will not be patched.

    I suppose, as Scott loves to point out, and I lead to in one of my earlier posts, they are skirting as close to the edge with their information as possible.

    I'm genuinely curious - when was the last time that MS released a security update for a chipset/processor? And even when they do, how often does that really happen? And lastly, how often does it happen after the processor is 1+ years old?

    It sounds like you have some misunderstanding about their article. They will not be releasing OS patches for older operating systems in hardware that runs specific processors or newer. The processor isn't what is being patched. It is the delineating factor in whether or not they will be patching the OS.

    I wonder why that should be the delineating factor, though.

    It does seem odd. I don't know if there is a technical reason or they just decided arbitrarily. Regardless we have the joy and, dare I say, pleasure, of dealing with the consequences...

    It seems like a push to get users to upgrade faster IMO. Another way of putting it is, "We're Microsoft and we do what we want. Screw you and you have no choice, but to grovel at our feet and meet our demands."

    If that is the case, it seems very shortsighted of them. Their marketshare is getting encroached on from all sides.

    So lower cost, more focused support is likely in their favour. Linux does the "support everything everywhere" thing. That's not Microsoft's game.


  • Service Provider

    @Kelly said:

    @scottalanmiller said:

    Maybe I am missing something but it doesn't seem odd at all to me. It sounds like they are not doing extra development to support new installs of old OSes on new hardware. I prefer that they do not, in fact, as it would be wasted development effort for systems that should not exist. I don't want the cost of Windows to go up to support people who want their no longer current systems to be being actively updated for new hardware.

    They're doing the work for old hardware. Speaking with a level of ignorance here, but it doesn't seem that hard to do best effort for the newest hardware unless there are some revolutionary changes to hardware and architecture coming.

    MS doesn't get to do "best effort." It has to be 100%. If they do best effort, which they might, they have to call it "unsupported." The announcement that you saw IS the announcement for best effort.


  • Service Provider

    @IRJ said:

    I disagree. The cost to maintain an OS is much less than the cost of making all the software vendors keep up. The prices for other software will go up as the development demands increase.

    But exclusively of software that makes the Microsoft ecosystem look bad. All of those vendors are vendors that hurt MS in the long run. Those other vendors, if they were doing even a crappy job, would not need to do anything to keep up. It is exclusively vendors not writing software as MS has told them to do so safely that would have an issue of any magnitude. MS goes dramatically out of their way to handhold vendors to make sure no software has issues like that.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    @IRJ said:

    I disagree. The cost to maintain an OS is much less than the cost of making all the software vendors keep up. The prices for other software will go up as the development demands increase.

    But exclusively of software that makes the Microsoft ecosystem look bad. All of those vendors are vendors that hurt MS in the long run. Those other vendors, if they were doing even a crappy job, would not need to do anything to keep up. It is exclusively vendors not writing software as MS has told them to do so safely that would have an issue of any magnitude. MS goes dramatically out of their way to handhold vendors to make sure no software has issues like that.

    In a dreamworld, all vendor software is up to date, but in reality it doesn't work that way. Changing software that is the backbone of your business isn't easy and there is no guarantee that the vendor you switch to will be any better in the long run.


  • Service Provider

    @IRJ said:

    In a dreamworld, all vendor software is up to date, but in reality it doesn't work that way. Changing software that is the backbone of your business isn't easy and there is no guarantee that the vendor you switch to will be any better in the long run.

    I totally understand that. But your point was that MS isn't doing the right thing by not supporting bad software because it costs everyone too much. But businesses choose that software and choose to support those vendors and it is those vendors, not MS, that are screwing those customers and creating cost, not MS. You can argue the value of old software that needs special support, but there is no way to hoist the blame for that cost on to MS. MS has made it easy for those issues to never exist. Blame the vendors at fault, it's not MS' fault. It's the vendors and customers faults that they make software that way and are okay with paying for software made that way. If it costs extra to support, that's their decision and has nothing to do with MS.


  • Service Provider

    Remember on the flipside, companies that DO run software from vendors that don't do this would not be happy if MS spent money supporting those other businesses. Microsoft has to choose who to cater to - those who make good software or those that make bad. Guess which makes the most sense to support.



  • I get what Microsoft is trying to do. They are trying to move the Android and iOS update model which is easy to support. They want everyone on Windows 10 and they will install updates forever and probably for free similar to how Android and Apple release their updates.


  • Service Provider

    @IRJ said:

    I get what Microsoft is trying to do. They are trying to move the Android and iOS update model which is easy to support. They want everyone on Windows 10 and they will install updates forever and probably for free similar to how Android and Apple release their updates.

    Exactly. And this isn't just good for them, but good for nearly everyone. And most importantly - it is good for their best customers and best partner vendors. The people who get "hurt" by this are those that have not embraced the Windows ecosystem and are rarely good customers already.

    So it is a way to improve the system on MS' end and to help their best customers get even more while only hurting the people that aren't too important to anyone and only those that could choose on their own to change their situation.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to MangoLassi was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.