theverge.com/2016/1/16/10780876/mic rosoft-windows-support-p

Everything you decide to hate is jews. How very convenient for you.
>inb4 jew

>>52495645
Isn't this very illegal?

>>52495675
jew

>>52495967
No, when you buy a Windows license you only get support for a specified amount of time.

>>52495967
It would be if "not providing platform specific software updates on older operating systems" meant "won't work on anything older than windows 10".
Luckily, it doesn't. Clickbait sites and dumbass anons love to misreport non issues.

BTW, AMD is doing the same with Zen.

>>52497442
>meant "won't work on anything older than windows 10".

That wouldn't be illegal either. Apple does it all the time.

>>52497480
Maybe not technically illegal, but the EU courts would still flip their shit.

File: 5325626123.jpg (32KB, 480x454px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x454px

>there is litteraly no escape from the botnet now

what would happen if you installed windows 7 on a new skylake processor?

>>52497579
It would work fine. If a chipset specific patch was released, it would only be for windows 10. You wouldn't know or care about it.

>>52497559
Windows 7 and 8.1 will still work on newer CPUs. They just won't be able to take advantage of any optimizations introduced by newer CPUs. If software vendors want to support the newer optimizations on older OSes they're free to do so.

>>52497480
MS also does it with MS Office and Internet Explorer.

>>52497506
They fine Microsoft every time they fart, they're thieving cunts. Fuck them.

>>52495645
https://archive.is/WBDKe
> the new rules mean that future PC owners with next-generation Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm processors will need to use Windows 10.
>AMD
What the fuck AMD?!

>>52497935
The hardware vendors have nothing to do with this. Say AMD adds an optimization to their CPUs for some particular task. It's up to the software vendors to update their software to take advantage of that optimization. The unoptimized code will still be backward compatible on the newer CPUs.

>>52497993
is this hardware "optimization" even worth the troubles?

>>52497993
It's like if MS said in 1997 that Windows 95 would not support 3DNow but Windows 98 would.

Windows 95 would run fine on 3DNow CPUs but wouldn't be able to use the 3DNow instructions.

>>52497935
It's just intel adding optimizations and microsoft not recompiling, and some of those optimizations might break binary compatibility.

Linux will still be fine.

>>52495645
>unironically visiting the /v/erge

Get out.

>Intel and Microsoft say that the platform [Intel Skylake] and Windows 10 were designed for each other.
what the fuck am I reading

>>52497559
Just keep to older hardware. People are still using C2D-era or even P4-era computers. It's not year 2000 when CPUs grew twice as powerful within a year and (AND that power was actually quickly utilized by software).

>>52500014
Spoutings of Sales and Marketing VPs.