Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-11 > #17326

Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms

From Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
Newsgroups alt.comp.os.windows-11, comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms
Date 2025-02-21 08:10 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <vp9u0a$3deds$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <H5msP.1310$e6J1.263@fx47.iad> <_VidnePYj72dpy_6nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@supernews.com> <FHssP.422382$z8ke.109144@fx15.iad> <vourme$12i4q$1@dont-email.me> <ILFsP.65543$GJLe.39984@fx05.iad>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 2/17/2025 7:15 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2025-02-17 3:23 a.m., Chris wrote:
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-02-16 2:18 p.m., Johnny LaRue wrote:
>>>> On Feb 16, 2025 at 8:53:44 AM EST, "CrudeSausage" <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2025-02-16 6:04 a.m., Joel wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-removes-windows-11-24h2-official-support-on-8th-9th-10th-gen-intel-cpus/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I can still boot Win11 on my box, because it's grandfathered in,
>>>>>> from 2021.  OK.  Great.  Nah, I'll stick with Linux, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is honestly very interesting. It's looking like Microsoft is
>>>>> borrowing Apple's approach to support.
>>>>
>>>> Good. It's about damn time.  Very hard to move forward when you are still
>>>> supporting ancient hardware (and software).
>>>>
>>>> And let's face it.  To have any future at all, Windows desperately needs to
>>>> move forward.
>>>
>>> Have you ever considered that an operating system could offer layers of
>>> functionality? For example, a 286 could run Windows 3.0, but if you
>>> wanted the enhanced features, you needed a 386. Why can't it be that way
>>> with Windows again?
>>
>> Because judging the tech market by 30 year old standards is daft. Windows
>> 11 has nothing in common with Windows 3.0.
> 
> Yes, but it can easily make itself available to lower-end machines by turning off some graphical features which are enabled by default and some security features which aren't supported on older machines. The core of Windows 11 should run on machines from the 2006-2007 era, it just won't.
> 

The truth of the matter is, 400,000,000 computers are going to the
landfill, and there's nothing we can do to stop it.

Even throwing them out is going to be a problem. The recycling plants
don't have the capacity for something like that. There will be a very
large pile out back of the shredding plant. Anything which requires manual
labor (remove mobo from desktop case) times 400,000,000 is "a lot of hours".

*******

Here are some breadcrumbs.

   CMPXCHG16b requirement only applies to the 64-bit installation of Windows 8.1;
   the 32-bit version should work just fine on your machine.

   CMPXCHG16b, PrefetchW, and LAHF/SAHF

   SSE2, PAE, NX

   SSE4.2 POPCNT, plus the vanilla (single operand) POPCNT

   Some applications also have at least an SSE2 requirement
   (could be used as an equivalent to the MOVEM on a 68K processor).
   That might have been a browser (all platforms) needing SSE2.

The labeling of the features varies a bit in utilities.

https://superuser.com/questions/931742/windows-10-64-bit-requirements-does-my-cpu-support-cmpxchg16b-prefetchw-and-la

LAHF-SAHF       -       Supports LAHF/SAHF instructions in 64-bit mode
NX              -       Supports no-execute page protection
CX16            *       Supports CMPXCHG16B instruction
X64             *       Supports 64-bit mode
PREFETCHW       -       Supports PREFETCHW instruction

Graphics are DX9, DX11, DX12, DX12 Ultimate, sorted into driver
versions XDDM and WDDM 1.1 thru 3.4 . Win10 22H2 requires min WDDM 1.1.
A HD6450 is WDDM 1.1 (it got only one WDDM driver). The 7900GT crashes
on Linux, runs on Windows 10. As example of "adventures for the unwary".
It's because of this and various secure boot messes (shim signing),
the industry has set this up such that "it takes too many hours
of maintenance to wrestle this stuff from the landfill". The industry
has won, with their stupid little tricks. Even Wayland plays a part
(follow the money). Wayland is the superfluous third tit.

   Paul

Back to alt.comp.os.windows-11 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:04 -0500
  Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 08:53 -0500
    Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Johnny LaRue <xxxxxx@yyyyyy.zzz> - 2025-02-16 19:18 +0000
      Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 16:23 -0500
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Adison Vohn Caterson <Adison@Caterson.invalid> - 2025-02-16 21:31 +0000
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 18:49 -0500
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:27 -0500
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 21:38 +0000
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-16 18:49 -0500
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 05:08 +0000
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 06:56 -0500
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-17 19:34 +0300
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 18:38 +0000
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:16 +0300
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-20 12:56 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-20 19:58 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:14 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-20 20:42 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 21:24 +1100
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 08:26 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-24 22:37 +1100
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-21 16:45 +0000
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-17 19:06 +0000
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:11 +0300
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-20 12:51 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 17:18 +0300
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:13 +0300
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 21:40 +1100
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 08:23 +0000
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 07:15 -0500
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 17:50 +0000
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-17 14:35 -0500
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 00:19 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-20 19:32 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 01:29 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-21 08:35 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 13:11 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:46 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 17:32 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ  <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 11:57 -0700
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-22 19:27 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ  <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 16:14 -0700
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 21:33 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-22 05:49 -0500
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 08:10 -0500
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:56 +0000
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:15 +0000
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-03-10 18:20 +0000
      Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:23 -0500
      Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-17 19:40 +0300
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-17 18:59 +0000
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 14:59 +0300
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-02-20 07:18 -0500
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:25 +0000
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-21 02:11 +0000
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-21 07:48 +0000
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-21 21:35 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-22 10:26 -0500
      Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:23 +0000
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2025-02-20 17:04 -0500
    Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:13 -0500
  Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2025-02-16 08:02 -0600
    Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:15 -0500
  Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-16 12:40 -0500
    Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-17 05:28 +0000
    Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:22 -0500
      Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-17 15:11 -0500
        Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:19 +0300
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-20 09:00 -0500
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2025-02-20 17:29 +0300
              Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-20 12:27 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-20 19:50 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-02-20 21:22 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 10:53 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-21 18:10 +0000
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 19:24 -0500
                Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2025-02-26 20:29 +0000
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 18:31 +1100
          Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2025-02-20 15:38 +0000
            Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 11:23 -0500
  Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-16 20:10 +0000
    Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 10:24 -0500
      Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-17 18:52 +0000
  Re: Microsoft admits that Windows is short-term support in realistic terms Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-02-21 08:13 +0000

csiph-web