Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Jun 2018 14:38 UTC
Windows

If your PC doesn't run Streaming Single Instructions Multiple Data (SIMD) Extensions 2, you apparently won't be getting any more Windows 7 patches. At least, that's what I infer from some clandestine Knowledge Base documentation changes made in the past few days.

Even though Microsoft says it's supporting Win7 until January 14, 2020, if you have an older machine - including any Pentium III - you've been blocked, and there's nothing you can do about it.

While support has to end somewhere - processors without SSE2 are really, really old - it's quite unfair to say you support Windows 7 until 2020, and then cut it off early for a number of customers. Consumer protection agencies should have something to say about this, right?

Thread beginning with comment 659053
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Sun 24th Jun 2018 15:22 UTC
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

This is NOT an anti-user or hostile act. Ancient hardware can't be supported indefinitely. You have to draw the line somewhere, and drawing it at CPU's that were EOL'ed 17 or 18 years ago in software that's a couple generations old is certainly well within reason. What other products can you name where you get nearly 20 years of support *after* the product was discontinued?

Hardware and software both have a shelf life. Nobody should be getting their tighty whitey's in a twist because support is being dropped long after it should've been. The appropriate response is the opposite. You should be thankful for getting all those years of continued support, and move on. The only thing you accomplish by throwing a fit over this is making yourself look like an whiny a**hole.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by Rugxulo on Sun 24th Jun 2018 20:27 in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
Rugxulo Member since:
2007-10-09

This isn't really up for debate. Even with the best arguments, it's unlikely that anyone at MS (or anywhere else) cares what we think. So it's pointless arguing here. But ....

This is NOT an anti-user or hostile act. Ancient hardware can't be supported indefinitely. You have to draw the line somewhere, and drawing it at CPU's that were EOL'ed 17 or 18 years ago in software that's a couple generations old is certainly well within reason. What other products can you name where you get nearly 20 years of support *after* the product was discontinued?


First of all, the very first P4s were from 18 years ago, but they were still manufactured (and slowly reached consumers) for several years. The AMD64 (e.g. Athlon64) came later in 2003. So only in 2003 were we just barely starting to get widely supported SSE2 (assuming you're also aware that AMD had a much smaller marketshare). My first P4 desktop was in 2002, and my AMD64 laptop came in 2007.

SSE2 is redundant in that you don't need it for software to function. In particular, newer (incompatible) cpu instructions are never a good reason to abandon a working machine. I'm probably not the first to say this, but "Software obsoletes faster than hardware these days". Sure, if you truly need better hardware, go ahead and consider upgrading. But just because someone somewhere (or a dumb compiler) can't be bothered to support legacy cpu instructions? Nah, that's a very weak reason. If everything else still works in hardware, then existing software shouldn't stop working.

It's easy to rationalize "17 or 18 years, OMG!!", but it's a slippery slope. Software and hardware are deprecated all too easily these days. "Hardware is cheap!!", no ... talk is cheap, telling people to upgrade literally everything every few years is cheap. At some point it's too much. I know it's mostly unavoidable, but let's stop pressuring everyone to change literally everything. It's exhausting. Some people are stubborn/lazy, but others have good reasons. Geeks are known for being irrationally zealous in their deprecation and calling things "dead" or "obsolete". Let's not encourage that attitude.


Hardware and software both have a shelf life. Nobody should be getting their tighty whitey's in a twist because support is being dropped long after it should've been. The appropriate response is the opposite. You should be thankful for getting all those years of continued support, and move on. The only thing you accomplish by throwing a fit over this is making yourself look like an whiny a**hole.


So many things break these days, but nobody cares. Is it a virtue to abandon working hardware/software? "Newer is better! It's faster, you'll get more done!!" Maybe, maybe not. My point is that if you break it, it's your fault. Better to not be the weak link that breaks the chain, if at all possible. Assuming that someone else will clean up your mess or fix your mistake is reckless. Make things better, not worse. Don't just excuse and write off every little breakage. Make sure you aren't the main one causing the problem for petty reasons. Let's not blindly increase other peoples' burdens, okay?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by unclefester on Mon 25th Jun 2018 07:39 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

A P4/Athlon won't even match a base model mobile Celeron in performance - and uses 10-20x as much power.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 25th Jun 2018 22:26 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

It's not about `faster is better` or `the new shiney`. There has to be a line drawn somewhere because businesses can't ignore diminished returns. It's not just unreasonable to expect support for this old stuff well beyond its shelf life, it's unsustainable from a business point of view. That's not the only reason to kill off old hardware. As another user pointed out, the really old stuff has a tendency to be far more power-hungry. While keeping a single machine running might not seem like a big deal, do the math if 100,000 people do it. Or 1,000,00, or 100,000,000+. It gets really bad really fast.

Why bother switching from incandescent bulbs to cfl's or better yet to led's? Why stop driving an old car that still runs fine but gets 10 miles to the gallon going downhill and blows toxic emissions like there's no tomorrow?

Yes, some people are die-hard's who share your point of view. I used to be one, and extremely stubborn about it. But in all honesty I can't say having that attitude ever made anything better. I was more of a problem than a solution.

Reply Parent Score: 3