Windows 7 Support End-of-Life (Also, Why I'd Prefer Upgrading to 8.1 Over 10)

This is what people will see when going to Microsoft's website up until the deadline shown. It is expected by most Windows users that Microsoft would no longer support Windows versions that become 10 years old and older, but it's damaging to Microsoft when they kill support for a platform that was still going strong and expect people to upgrade. Even worse when there aren't better alternatives.

Windows XP End of Life


View attachment 180478
The message that was sent to users shortly before the end of support.​

Go back to 2014. After 12 years of support due to there being so many people who loved using Windows XP, and perhaps arguably Microsoft's best version of Windows to date, Microsoft announced that support for all editions of Windows XP would end. They also used imagery of an old computer system running Windows XP versus a new system running the latest Windows at the time, Windows 8.1. Ridiculous, to say the least, as there were newer systems which could efficiently run Windows XP 64-bit. Yet, despite the security risks of a dead system, according to StatCounter a surprising 1.54% of people still use Windows XP. It may not sound like much, but considering that there are approximately 7 billion people on the planet, roughly 100 million still use Windows XP. Now, this estimate can very much be inaccurate, since not everyone owns a computer, but it could still be a fairly high amount considering that this is a statistic basing on how many computers have Windows XP, not exactly how many people use it, since more than one person can use a desktop or laptop. I wouldn't be surprised if I were to discover that 50 million still use XP.

Windows 7 End of Life


January of next year, all Windows 7 versions will no longer be supported (save those that are protected by volume licensing, in which it is extended until January 10th, 2023). What will this mean for Windows 7 users? Of all the currently supported Windows version, Windows 7 is the best, beating Windows 8.1 in the market share by over 25% globally according to StatCounter. Microsoft is now pushing messages on systems still running Windows 7, prompting users to upgrade to Windows 10.

Why I Do Not Recommend Windows 10


640px-Windows_10_Home_Version_20H2_Desktop.png

Windows 10 integrates several new features, including Cortana, which collects user data automatically.​

There are those who are gonna scoff, but it's actually been proven over and over. Microsoft is collecting your data. Even as recently as August of this year, because of the GDPR Microsoft is consistently being investigated about their data collection. The best way that they are doing it nowadays is with Windows 10, which has various diagnostic and info-collecting services on by default. Even after turning these features off, some personal information can still be collected by Microsoft. There is a way to remove built-in software manually, but it becomes reset after every major update.

Is Windows 8.1 Safer Than Windows 10?


Windows_8.1_Pro_Default_Start_Screen.png

Due to there being many gripes about lack of desktop integration in Windows 8, Microsoft released Windows 8.1, which can be either seen as a mere upgrade or a separate version altogether.​

Let's be honest here - unless Microsoft has stopped using it altogether, there really isn't such a thing as a "safe" version of Windows. However, many of these things which can be potential privacy breaches are built into Windows 10 by default. Windows 8.1 lacks several features (like Cortana) which collects and stores information remotely that has to be manually deleted or retrieved, so unless you add them to Windows 8.1 (via Windows Update or their own website), then yes it is somewhat better, in regards to privacy and security from the very developers of it. One thing's for sure: it's a heck of a lot better than Windows 8! :P
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people

Comments

Jayro
I feel like the only person that doesn't have any issues installing Windows updates. But then again, I don't let them accumulate or hold-off either. I just install whatever comes my way, and reboot. Unless there's a driver conflict (Rare these days, but it happens) I will let Windows do it's thing without problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
burhansalih
I have been using windows 10 in a business environment for the last year and a half never had 1 issue so far touch wood.
 
R
The biggest issue I have with Windows 10 is the direction Microsoft has taken for this Software Service; by turning it into the single Operating System for their foreseeable future, they basically force Updates on older hardware, which is a form of Planned Obsolescence I do not want on significant hardware investments.

My main Computer purchases for the last decade have been Laptops and I have bought at least one for every year, for family and myself. I am at that point in my life where I want to contribute the minimum amount to pollution and I want the peace of mind of using an Operating System that works optimally on the hardware configuration it's installed on, until said hardware goes kaput.

At the moment, this is what Linux gives me so most of the aforementioned older Laptops have been turned to Linux machines that work magnificently for Office-related tasks, as they should.

This is not the option given in Windows 10.

As such, I will continue to keep an eye on and support Linux developing a larger hold and a more stable OS to rival what is Mainstream today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Foxi4
How is it "not an option" on Windows 10? Nobody is forcing you to update anything - you still have access to the same administrative tools. You can pick and choose what updates you want to install and when. Admittedly I would've preferred to have the on/off button in the actual WU client, but disabling the updater is trivial. In the age of hardware exploits that are not targeting vulnerable OS'es, but vulnerable CPU's a stringent update schedule is kind of required for an everyday user who is not computer-savvy - nerds are in the minority, I'm afraid. I also don't buy the whole "planned obsolescence" thing in regards to Windows 10 - the system has gotten slimmer and faster over time, not more bloated as you suggest. You can run Windows 10 on a Pentium machine right now with no tweaks. No joke, it'll work, and it won't chug all that much considering those CPU's don't even support the required instruction sets.
 
R
... I guess this is a reply to me so, firstly, I don't particularly care what you buy and don't buy.
As they say, you do you.

I have several premium Ultrabooks that fly on Windows 7 but can barely operate on Windows 10, so I don't particularly care for your Pentium II reference.

Coming back to the issue, Windows 10 Home is what most Thin and Lights are installed with; even some of my Flagships come with Home first. Updates aren't something that can be permanently turned off there and I do not need to spend my life rolling back Updates that the machine does in the background.

If you're more of a slave to your machine then, again, you do you.

Not everything I use has to be a Pirated version, and the same goes for my family.
There was a time when Microsoft managed to work with local Governments in South East Asia to get them to search Laptops at the Airport and check whether their OS is legally obtained or not. Some people got caught, so why would I want to gift that worry to people whose lives I work to make easier.

If you don't travel the World as much as I do, nor plan to after the Pandemic, then by all means, enjoy all the Piracy you get.

We are at different points in our lives and our views of what are acceptable risks are also different.
I don't need the satisfaction of winning a PC pissing contest more than I do providing a simple solution to make my family's day, anywhere they are in the World.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Foxi4
You absolutely, positively, 100% can permanently turn off updates on Windows 10. It takes two clicks, either in the Services menu (disabling the Windows Update service) or in Group Policy (Configure Automatic Updates policy) depending on which one is available in your version of the OS (Group Policy is generally reserved to higher-end deployments of Windows, it's an administrator tool). You can also do it via the Registry editor, if you know what you're looking at. The bottleneck on Windows 10 is the storage it's installed on, not the hardware you run it on - if you install it on a drive that still remembers the Berlin Wall, this is what you get. Once you remove the spinning rust out of the equation, the OS behaves perfectly fine. The Win10 kernel is perfectly happy running on legacy CPU's with minimal memory footprint since that's the environment it runs on in industrial applications. I'm not criticising your purchasing decisions, I'm simply correcting you since you're wrong, demonstrably so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Foxi4
Slight correction on my end, the only thing Windows 10 does require to run from the CPU is PAE (Physical Address Extension), so not *all* legacy chips will support it. I've corrected my post to reflect that since the feature isn't available across the board - some digging into the supported features required, but alas, there's only so much you can expect from hardware that's older than the average user. Will it run well on such a setup? No, but primarily because that setup is too old to run any modern application, not necessarily because the OS is holding it back.
 
R
This is so you have a better picture.

I buy a Laptop to gift to family. I will not always be with said family member.
The Laptop runs Windows 10 Home and I turn off Updates. It turns back on after some days.

Laptop installs most recent Updates, slows down significantly than when I bought it, which was at least a year ago.

This I do not need to deal with, especially with plenty of Laptops.
I don't have this problem on Windows 10 Professional, but that isn't the OS the Laptop came with.

If I upgrade then there will be issues at Airports which my family do not want on their travels.
Who wants to get arrested over Windows on a transit.

This problem doesn't happen on Windows 7.
It also doesn't happen on Linux because Microsoft isn't hunting down their users.

I'm also at that point where I'm tired of playing this game with Microsoft because support has been dropped for older systems even though they run just as fast if kept on the initial software.

If Internet connection is the main risk, then let me be the judge of whether I'd risk it.
Don't forcibly make my rig obsolete on some excuse like that when I can just as easily turn off its Internet connection.
 
Foxi4
I wouldn't really switch OS'es on the grounds of risk mitigation, I just find that the 10 kernel is faster than the 7 kernel on the same machines when configured correctly. I fully understand your concerns in regards to licensing issues, I just find them to be a negligible worry seeing that a license can be purchased fairly cheaply. If the laptop already has a pre-installed OS and you don't plan on spending too much time squeezing every bit of performance you can out of it, I totally get your point of view.
 
R
Since this is Post is here, I might as well add my heads-up to anyone in the future who may run into Windows problems on multiple Laptops like I have; it's always heresay until you experience it yourself, so I can understand the scepticism.

The first thing to understand is that nobody is expecting an older Laptop to run newer Software or play newer Games.
That has never been the point.

The point is to have said Laptop running exactly the same way it did when we bought it; if it was a Flagship back then, with its original Drivers and Settings then it should stay that way on those Drivers and Settings. Simple.

So these are the steps that you check for when the Laptop is slower:
  • If there are Hardware malfunctions and issues, then it's the end;
  • If there are no Hardware malfunctions and issues then, using the hidden OS Partition inside the Laptop, run a Factory Reset;
  • After said Factory Reset, when Windows is back at its original Settings as it was originally handed to you, if Laptop is still slow then it's the end;
  • If after Factory Reset the Laptop runs faster, then you have yourself a case of Planned Obsolescence due to Updates.
Again, very simple.
My results have always been the last, which has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

I've already mentioned a while back how NVIDIA treated my Flagship Laptop during the first years of their Gaming Laptop line, and now I've been getting all of this from other Premium Laptops I've been buying with Windows 10 Home; definitely not a Happy Camper.

Seems like 2022 is the year I buy another MacBook Pro and start transitioning family to those instead.
 
Jayro
If a laptop is slow, I throw in some extra RAM to at least bring it up to 8GB dual-channel, and make sure the sticks match. Then I throw in the fastest SSD type the laptop supports (usually SATA 3). Then I install a de-bloated Windows 10 Pro, and install just the basics like Chrome, VLC, Sumatra PDF, and 7zip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Foxi4
Couple of things to keep in mind - your computer will *never* run exactly the same as it has when it rolled off the factory line due to transistor degradation and TIM degradation. Depending on how often you use your computer this may be more or less pronounced, but there's a reason why Intel only guarantees that their CPU's will work at stock speeds and voltages for 3 years. Older machines that have seen extensive use over the years just don't have the same parameters as they used to - the VRM is old, so is the silicon, and that's reflected in overall performance. In terms of losing performance due to updates, you have to consider the fact that adding support for new features available on newer chips will negatively impact older setups, to an extent. With that being said, a properly refurbished, clean machine will operate at acceptable parameters for decades. I won't really comment on using the Windows Recovery partition because it's the first thing I delete on any system when debloating it - Windows is not keen on rolling changes back anyway, it's a messy process, and a fresh install is always preferable. The laptop I still use for most of my coding and writing is an ASUS X53Sv with an i3 and an NVidia 520MX, it's 10 years old at this point and it's still a rocket. If you want to be kind to your hardware, give it the gift of an SSD and be sure to repaste it every couple of years - it will thank you by maintaining high levels of performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
The Real Jdbye
@Foxi4 There is a difference, but it's not as big as you might think. In reality the performance loss from degradation is so minute you're never going to notice in real world usage. It's just about measurable with benchmarks. It doesn't explain why computers seem to get slower over time. That's likely just because software and websites get more bloated and demanding and older hardware just isn't able to keep up. Sometimes an old PC is still slow even when you put Windows 2000 on it - I can't explain that one. Maybe it was still slow when it was new and our standards were just that much lower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jayro
I also obliterate any recovery partitions I find, and I always turn off and disable hibernation. More often than not, I have to fight the machine to wake up from hibernate more than it's useful, so hiberfill.sys is usually one of the first things to go. (Plus, with 32GB of RAM being a standard in all my builds, that's a lot of reclaimed SSD space!)
 
Foxi4
@The Real Jdbye This was true before processors broke the Gigahertz barrier. On a modern processor degradation can cost you quite a few of Mhz, or shorten your boost window significantly when you need the CPU the most. Old chips were working on enormous traces with fairly low currents, modern processors draw 150-300W peak on lithographies the are just barely possible to achieve on silicon. Not only that, heat cycling the chips affects silicon doping and over really extended periods of time gates start misbehaving - the error rate noticeably increases and error correction has to mitigate that, which leads to slowdowns and inconsistent operation. It's a whole different ballgame now, degradation has real implications in workflow. Buildzoid actually tested this and after running a 3700X at somewhat high vcore settings for 60 hours he successfully managed to shave off 25Mhz off the clock. That's 3 days of operating at peak. It also doesn't account for capacitor degradation which strongly affects power delivery - older electronics need to be recapped even if they weren't extensively used to even dream of reaching stock parameters again. You can observe this on older GPU's especially - in many cases they will bluescreen or refuse to boost because the internal metering systems no longer align with the actual board. Is it a fast process? No - not really. Is it noticeable after a decade? You bet it is. Yes, modern applications will never work well on old hardware - they weren't meant to run on it. With that being said, when a computer performs poorly and the software is exactly the same as it was when it was brand-new, we have to accept that the hardware has degraded to a noticeabe extent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Foxi4
Hardly a scientific test - define "well-used". Not only that, you're putting an old GPU against the same old GPU, just mint and out of the box - both have degraded, one just degraded more so than the other since it's used. I like LTT, but this data is hardly concrete. It's hard to argue about the issue with a sample size of one on both ends. What I will tell you is that Intel routinely checks degradation effects on their chips and their methodology is this: they take 100 chips and test their boosting behaviour for an extended amount of time, at the end of the stress test they end up with 3 dead chips on avarage, which translates to a 3% failure rate. They do this to calculate reliability, and using this methodology they calculated that 3 years is about right in terms of maintaining stock performance. These are not "crib deaths" - these are chips that behaved within stock parameters and were literally ground to death by Intel, on purpose. A lot of the performance loss is "concealed" by software - when the chip behaves out of spec, the BIOS simply raises vcore slightly, we're talking about milivolts here. Intel chips are particularly susceptible to degradation over time since they stopped soldering the heat spreaders to the die - they basically only use TIM now. In order to achieve the same or similar performance 10 years down the line, you will have to delid the chip, regardless of whether the silicon has degraded or not. Don't look too far for evidence - just pick up a PS3 and find out if it sounds the same as when it was brand new.
 

Blog entry information

Author
HarveyHouston
Views
2,183
Comments
258
Last update

More entries in Personal Blogs

  • a_username_that_is_cool
    4: Reddit
    Finally, number 4! Never thought this day would come, did you? Uhh...
  • Rolfie
    books
    1. I am cool as hell, have one million dollars 2. I am banned from...
  • KleinesSinchen
    Syncthing is fun!
    Having been kinda active in an Android forum I quickly got sick about...
  • KleinesSinchen
    Feeling at home here
    Not much to say this time. I'm depressed. Like almost always. Trying to...
  • BakerMan
    I'll start, rate mine 1-10
    It's a very mixed bag, some rock, some rap, some video game music, a...

More entries from HarveyHouston

Share this entry

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    HiradeGirl @ HiradeGirl: What.