Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Microsoft Blocks Updates for New CPUs on Windows 7 and 8.1

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday March 19 2017, @01:07AM   Printer-friendly
from the no-updates-for-you dept.

Celestial writes:

Microsoft Windows 7 or 8.1 users on Intel Kaby Lake or AMD Ryzen CPUs will not be able to download Windows updates.

Microsoft announced some time ago that new silicon as the company called it back then would not be officially supported on Windows 7 or 8.1.

This meant basically that only Windows 10 would support Intel's, AMD's and Qualcomm's new processors, while Windows 7 or 8.1 would not.

This does not mean that Windows 7 or 8.1 won't install on machines running these new processors, but that Microsoft (and the manufacturer) won't offer any form of support for those devices.

A new support page on the Microsoft website suggests that users who run an unsupported processor on an older version of Windows -- read Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 -- won't be able to scan for or download Windows updates anymore.

Users will get the following error message when they run the scan:

Unsupported Hardware
Your PC uses a processor that isn't supported on this version of Windows and you won't receive updates.

It looks like I'll be moving to BSD or Linux sooner than I planned.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Microsoft Blocks Updates for New CPUs on Windows 7 and 8.1 | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 102 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @03:04AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @03:04AM (#481016)

    So you tried Ubuntu, then tried Mint (based on Ubuntu) and Xubuntu (self-explanatory), and in another comment, mention you also tried Debian (which Ubuntu is based on)? I can almost see a pattern here...

    I'm not saying you necessarily would have had better success with any other distro, just that if you're trying to get away from an issue with one distro, the best strategy might involve trying another distro that is not intimately related. I'd recommend Arch (if you can live with systemd as default, other inits available but unsupported), but there are others who would swear by Suse, Fedora, or something else. (I'm assuming Gentoo (my current poison) and Slackware need not apply.) The point is not one of these in particular, but that any of them would be much less likely to share common faults with Ubuntu than the other options you tried.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   1  

  • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 19 2017, @03:23AM (2 children)

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday March 19 2017, @03:23AM (#481021) Homepage

    When I'm ready to fiddle then I'll run Slackware and/or BSD, while touching upon SELinux for that paranoid user experience.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @01:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @01:36PM (#481129)

      while touching upon SELinux for that paranoid user experience.

      Sounds exciting, keep us posted with the feelings.

    • (Score: 2) by ragequit on Monday March 20 2017, @03:37PM

      by ragequit (44) on Monday March 20 2017, @03:37PM (#481538) Journal

      Actually, my go-to is Slackware. 14.2 (w/KDE (FUCK Gnome)) has been running flawlessly so far.

      --
      The above views are fabricated for your reading pleasure.