Microsoft to intentionally brick Windows 7/8 Update on Kaby Lake & Ryzen Systems

[Jeroen3]

An IT manager in a big company told me. Intel started removing instructions sets to conserve energy and space.
He said that it was already impossible to install 32 bit Windows on those machines.

However, I could not find any evidence backing his claim yet. But it does not seem unreasonable to me.
Keeping this legacy stuff up is the only reason why you're still putting a 100 Watt processor in a pc.

[Faith]

An IT manager in a big company told me. Intel started removing instructions sets to conserve energy and space.
He said that it was already impossible to install 32 bit Windows on those machines.

However, I could not find any evidence backing his claim yet. But it does not seem unreasonable to me.
Keeping this legacy stuff up is the only reason why you're still putting a 100 Watt processor in a pc.

I'd need a more reliable source for that. It would be an extremely arrogant approach as the vast majority of applications out there are still x86 32-bit.

For applications especially where large memory sets are not required being compiled as x86 32-bit means a smaller binary and lower memory footprint than an x86-64 equivalent compile.

Sure, there are other reasons to want to use x86-64, but it's going to be at least a decade until mainstream x86 32-bit is phased out.

Even Windows 10 still comes in an x86 32-bit edition.

Make no mistake; this is nothing but a poorly executed stunt by Microsoft in attempt to move more users over to Windows 10.

[Jeroen3]

I'd need a more reliable source for that. It would be an extremely arrogant approach as the vast majority of applications out there are still x86 32-bit.

Yes, me too. It would create quite a fuss if it were true. And I've not yet seen much fuss.

[Nusa]

Well, Microsoft patches are in today. And it is confirmed; my notebook with a Kaby Lake CPU (i7-7700HK) and Windows 7 installed now receives an "Unsupported Hardware" error and Windows Update no longer runs.

My desktop with a Kaby Lake PCH (Z270) and a Skylake CPU (i7-6700K) continues to work fine, however. It's also running Windows 7.

For those who are curious; the actual April 2017 security update installed fine.

Only after its installation was Windows Update bricked.

This does mean however that we have a month to find a workaround against this frankly idiotic limitation.

Can you simply uninstall that security update?

[Monkeh]

I've heard this block isn't all intentional. It's the effect of removing legacy x86 32 bit support from the chip.
To keep Windows 7 running on that would require extra work.

Complete bullshit.

Most Windows software is still 32-bit, and these CPUs still boot looking like an 8086.

[John Coloccia]

I've heard this block isn't all intentional. It's the effect of removing legacy x86 32 bit support from the chip.
To keep Windows 7 running on that would require extra work.

Complete bullshit.

Most Windows software is still 32-bit, and these CPUs still boot looking like an 8086.

Microsoft actually RECOMMENDS that you install the 32 bit version of Office 365 so that plugins and things like that actually work. I have 64 bit installed at home, but I installed 32 bit at work just so I don't have to deal with whatever vague incompatibilities they're warning about.

[Faith]

Microsoft actually RECOMMENDS that you install the 32 bit version of Office 365 so that plugins and things like that actually work. I have 64 bit installed at home, but I installed 32 bit at work just so I don't have to deal with whatever vague incompatibilities they're warning about.

I actually consider that a security feature as there are too many poorly-maintained plugins out there riddled with bugs and plagued with security vulnerabilities.

[rrinker]

 I've got 64-bit Office installed everywhere. Have yet to run into a compatibility problem. Even when maintaining an old Access application for a client, it's like one step to fix the security if I make changes on my 64-bit version.

[Mr. Scram]

I've got 64-bit Office installed everywhere. Have yet to run into a compatibility problem. Even when maintaining an old Access application for a client, it's like one step to fix the security if I make changes on my 64-bit version.

It is much better than it used to be, though third party plug-ins can still be weird and wonderful.

[rrinker]

 I only went 64 bit with Office 2013. Now I am using 2016. Most any plugin we se here is for Outlook, for meetings, IM, and our ticketing system, and they all play fine with 64 bit Outlook. 64 bit before Windows 7 was flakey on the OS level, let alone the apps, but I've been running 64 bit Windows since 7.
 Outside of some third party stencils for Visio, the only other plug in of any sort I have is a custom script I wrote for Word to update the document variables in out standard documentation templates. ANd that because I am lazy - the default in Word updates either the body or the headers and footers, not both in one operation. So I created a simple script to update the entire document and stuffed it on the menu with an icon.

[voltsandjolts]

Potential workaround for running Win7 on Kaby Lake / Ryzen systems:

http://news.softpedia.com/news/hack-allows-windows-7-to-run-on-new-processors-despite-microsoft-restriction-514966.shtml

What’s important to know is that while this script patches a system file (and you are strongly recommended to back it up before making any changes), Microsoft can introduce the limitation once again at any moment using patches shipped via Windows Update. This means that re-applying the patch might be needed at a later time, though some other modifications might be needed if Microsoft also blocks the current method.

[hans]

An IT manager in a big company told me. Intel started removing instructions sets to conserve energy and space.
He said that it was already impossible to install 32 bit Windows on those machines.

However, I could not find any evidence backing his claim yet. But it does not seem unreasonable to me.
Keeping this legacy stuff up is the only reason why you're still putting a 100 Watt processor in a pc.

I've a harder time believing that. Are you sure it is instruction sets? Because all programs that run on the system must be ISA compatible as well.. And there are a lot of 32-bit applications.
Just start with virtual machines. If they all need to be patched I don't think anyone in the server world with their right mind would buy such a chip.

Also Intel keeps pushing larger GPU's on their mainstream CPU's these days, rather than giving us more cores like AMD is doing right now. If there is any area to be saved, then right there..

I'm also not sure how much can be saved. The datapath of a CPU probably wont shrink (because 64-bit is wider than 32-bit..). So perhaps the controller could be simplified if some old instruction sets were scrapped.. but I think it's a drop in the ocean considering the complexity of the new vector instructions sets and the old legacy instruction sets.

Speaking of legacy stuff; these guys thought that a PS4 gameconsole should be capable of booting linux in no-time, because PS4 is also x86 based. Wrong. All legacy "x86 PC" stuff (@11:45) was scrapped and were all reimplemented in some kind of proprietary Sony/AMD collaboration chip.
Real nice talk though: https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-7946-console_hacking_2016

Perhaps its about time some of this crap was scrapped.. Just like we got UEFI pretty well integrated right now as well.

[wraper]

Speaking of legacy stuff; these guys thought that a PS4 gameconsole should be capable of booting linux in no-time, because PS4 is also x86 based. Wrong. All legacy "x86 PC" stuff (@11:45) was scrapped and were all reimplemented in some kind of proprietary Sony/AMD collaboration chip.

Watched that video a while ago. x86 stuff wasn't really dropped, PC stuff was. And it was re-implemented not by AMD. It uses Marvell SoC instead of south bridge.

[Monkeh]

Speaking of legacy stuff; these guys thought that a PS4 gameconsole should be capable of booting linux in no-time, because PS4 is also x86 based. Wrong. All legacy "x86 PC" stuff (@11:45) was scrapped and were all reimplemented in some kind of proprietary Sony/AMD collaboration chip.

Watched that video a while ago. x86 stuff wasn't really dropped, PC stuff was. And it was re-implemented not by AMD. It uses Marvell SoC instead of south bridge.

Plus they did some really damn strange things. But that's what happens when you let Sony loose with hardware. Same with software, really.. just Sony. 'nuff said.