Microsoft cuts off Windows 10 support early for some PCs
-
Simply put: Intel has ended the support for these CPUs, which means that there will NOT come any new drivers for those components. It would be plain stupidity by MS to keep supporting hardware that has reached the end of it's support lifecycle.
Atom processors work a bit differently compared to i3, i5 and i7 CPUs and not to forget AMD. AMD and Intel CPU architecture has not changed much for a very long time. Core functionality in both Intel and AMD mainline CPUs work pretty much the same. Thus old and new CPUs has all the same core instruction sets, and this makes it easy to support ancient CPUs even after multiple generations newer CPUs has been released.
What comes to Apple...they have always been terrible at supporting a lot of different hardware. But this is also one of the reasons OS X works really well on the hardware it's designed for.
-
-
@lx07 If I can't upgrade I can't upgrade. I got a free upgrade from 8.0 to 8.1, and another free upgrade to Windows 10. And every new build, which is essentially a new OS release, was also free. It's not like Microsoft owes me anything. I went from XP to 7 to 8.0 to 8.1 to 10 on these reliable old clunkers. They don't owe me anything either. 
It wouldn't be the end of the world if I had to buy a new desktop PC Or just do everything on my laptop.
-
I can relate and I totally agree with the above statements.
Today tech moves forward rapidly and so should to people using it do too, in order to keep up with the development.
I have a 20 year old computer setup that still works great, but I can't expect to run Windows 10 with touch screen and related services on it. I can however run a lightweight Linux distribution, DOS and some of the older Windows distributions on it.
That computer is more of an hobby, and it would not make any sense to use it for daily work related tasks (though I could).
-
Well i think we need an oficial statement from Microsoft,otherwise this news is more like a fake news,created for attention or popularity,of one or more sites.
The fun fact is,i installed Windows 10 on some old PC's (from 2004-2006),and i didn't see any issues with them,Those PC's even got upgraded to latest version of 10 (1703)
-
-
Well i think we need an oficial statement from Microsoft,otherwise this news is more like a fake news,created for attention or popularity,of one or more sites.
The fun fact is,i installed Windows 10 on some old PC's (from 2004-2006),and i didn't see any issues with them,Those PC's even got upgraded to latest version of 10 (1703)
This is a fact. It is hardcoded into Windows. As I mentioned earlier, Intel Atom Z CPUs compared to all main stream AMD and other Intel CPUs are very different.
Biggest difference is the integrated graphics, which requires drivers and Intel does not provide drivers for these blocked CPUs.
If we really think about this, it's the driver version that is blocked, not the CPU itself, thus the message stating that the "software will be uninstalled". Same messages appear for old AMD, NVidia and Intel drivers and many old system software.
-
Looks like it is going that way alas. It isn't yet as bad as Apple - my 2006 MacBook Pro runs Windows 10 perfectly. The last version of OSX it would install was 2009's Snow Leopard which stopped getting security updates 5 years ago or so.
My MacBook Pro is from Mid-2010 running a Core i7. It started with Snow Leopard and has had every version of Mac OS X except Lion, now running the latest/renamed macOS Sierra [no longer OS X]. Most of the Upgrades were inexpensive, about $29, until Apple made the last few free.
-
So you'd rather have Windows install, and then immediately BSOD on the first reboot?
Do I really need to answer this question? Please re-read what I wrote.
-
![]()
It always makes me laugh when people start thinking lawyers in these situations. It's a lot more complicated than you think. And Microsoft did actually warn of this early. The fact that some didn't think this would happen is irrelevant here. In short, MS, didn't do anything that wasn't stated.
NOW... is it right is another story, but legally, I see no standing here. But, I'm not a lawyer, nor do I have any legal training. I'm just going on life experience, and in the end, I'm thinking MS would prevail for the basic reason explained above. But, then again, I'm also one who still don't see how common sense didn't prevail in the
hot coffee between the legs case, in which McDonald's lost 
I don't have a legal background either but wrote the above post based upon life experience and it doesn't make me laugh when people begin talking of lawyering up. There are always lawyers looking to chase stuff and human beings looking for an opportunity to slip on a banana and sue. Put the two together and you get a suit. How a judge and jury will decide in any given case is anyone's guess and that isn't as it should be, as you say you don't understand the McDonald's case decision, nor do I; nonetheless a cousin of mine has a husband that worked as a paralegal on that case and argued with me that the woman had a strong case. I still disagreed with him. Go figure, but this isn't a matter I take lightly because it is one of the many things that makes for arbitrariness in the US legal system, a characteristic it should not have.
-
Point taken. And glad we agree on the McDonalds case :)
-
-
Well the key phrase is ... "supported lifetime of the device" - which means whilst it's being supported .. if the vendor drops support, it's (obviously) no longer supported and therefore I can't see how MS could be held accountable... that's my interpretation anyhow.
Quote