Service Pack 2?

Windows 7 already has a predetermined end of life of 2020. Microsoft will release service packs as needed just like with XP until Windows 7 reaches it's end of life.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lif...

Interesting...

So they fully intend to continue running W7 along side W8? Just like they've been doing with 7 and XP?

Yep. At least until 2020.

Also if you look at the XP service packs they were at least 2 years apart. It has only been a year since Windows 7 SP1.

Service packs for XP were a whole different kettle of fish - they added fundamental enhancements/changes to the OS. Microsofts policy for 7 (and Vista) is that these are more of a wrap-up of the patches from the previous period. Hence only 2 for Vista, and I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see another for 7.

Well for example I heard that AMD is claiming that one of the reasons it's Bulldozers is doing so poorly is because Windows 7 doesn't know how to "see" it's cores properly. They say this should be fixed in Windows 8, and that it should be able to use Bulldozer to it's fullest potential (from what I understand).

This seems odd considering the huge number of people who use (and probably will continue to use for a good while still) Windows 7. It seems that for something like that, a patch or Service Pack update would be easier. Though... granted, Windows releasing a whole SP for just one chip would be a little silly...

I dunno, it just feels like they jumped into W8 rather early.

As long as Moore's law holds there will be the need for Windows 7 to be changed as much as XP was between now and 2020.

if you look through the roadmap of windows releases its only ever around 2-3 years between them.

XP was a freak that stayed around for nearly 9 years.

Service packs generally only give fixes to issues and security problems they dont add new features. I think we will see a SP2 for 7 eventually but nothing much after that.

you dont HAVE to upgrade and they will support win 7 (minor updates & patches) for another few years. but can you imagine the man power required if they still had to support all of their OS's.

That's just a lame excuse for a poor product, there have been many recent articles posted where this has been shown to be an AMD myth. AMD had access to Windows 7 for years prior to release, and now they claim that it is an OS problem, very weak. I for one was quite disappointed that Bulldozer wasn't better to push Intel.

Yep. AMD actually had access to Windows 7 to optimize Bulldozer longer than Intel did for Sandy Bridge since Sandy Bridge was released 8 months before Bulldozer.

You 2 do realize that you are comparing technology differences right? Intel chips are typically single dual and quad the amd bulldozer is 8. And windows 7 was optimized with intel chips fully in mind. If its untrue and a myth why then did microsoft create a patch for them as well as promise that they are working on an update for this very problem? And why are they saying they are making windows 8 alot more capable of handling the amd chips? And how does that equal a myth?

It appears Win8 is trying to capture more mobile markets and has superficial improvements for desktop users.

Unless you use a touch screen monitor or a similar touch screen technology (i've seen some schools using a board like this in class rooms)

Hi  

XP was a good OS...

Vista was a bad OS...

Windows 7 is a good OS...

Windows 8 is a financial decision and possibly a good or bad OS...

Microsoft is a BUSINESS, its all about making money....

All the best Brett  

Yup, seems like about ever other OS since DOS out of Microsoft was a bust (thinking about ME and Vista especially) -- hopefully Win 8 won't be, as I consider 7 to be quite good. At least we have 7 for another 8 years, if that isn't the case.

I also concur with this statement...


that's how I look at this too...

Oh... OHH... Well, that explains a few things.

Yeah, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks.

Best answer selected by PTNLemay.

This topic has been closed by Nikorr