No plans for Windows 7 SP2

Like bigcitycat said above, businesses have made the transition to Windows 7 and technical schools are in the process of or already have done the same.......they aren't dropping support for 7 anytime soon. No legit business is going to go to Win8, and I doubt any school/college will either.

As for a SP2..........I've been saying they need another SP to roll up all the 100+ updates that you need AFTER SP1 was released. By the end of this year, there could potentially be close to 200 updates to apply to a fresh install of Windows 7 SP1 and that is ridiculous.

I don't think anything in 7 needs patching, but using a SP as a container for the other updates would be fine with me.

If your goal is to kill Windows 7, why would you provide an SP2? By not providing one, installations become so cumbersome they are no longer worth doing. That way their plan to force everyone to the new Microsoft OS would be well under way. Combine that with an artificially short support life for the desktop and the job is done or so they think.

Let's look at history:

1. They recanted on killing Windows XP and it is still not completely dead.
2. They finally submitted to the fact that Vista was a pile of crap and developed Windows 7.
3. They extended the life of Windows 7 beyond their previously published support life.

What is next?

Will they double down on Windows 8 and complete the killing of Windows 7?

OR

Will they relent and trim Windows 8 back to a rational touch only system and upgrade Windows 7?

Past history suggests they will relent. However, their current position seems to be that they think they know better than a million developers and several hundred million users. That suggests they will continue down their current dead end path trying to out Apple, Apple. That is not going to happen any more than Apple can stay Apple with Jobs gone.

I think they realize that Windows 7 will be in use as longs as XP has and, although they truly want you to buy the latest Operating Systems, planned Windows 7 to last ten years or so.

x BlueRobot said:

Microsoft should have made two separate editions of Windows 8 for the two different types of user; very much like there is different editions of the same operating system for different needs of each user.
So, have Windows 8 Professional for Desktops and have Windows 8 Professional for Tablets, then everyone will be able to benefit from the better performance of Windows 8.

There's just one major flaw to your theory...... It makes sense! It sounds reasonable!
That's why Microsoft won't do it. LOL

Hi there
I'll just continue to run W7 as a VM on a tweaked Linux machine -- VMware is now so good - even for video - that the overhead of a VM is literally nothing on a decent machine.

I've messed around with W8 a bit -- it's definitely "Snappier" and I like the built in virtual DVD / CD facility (it mounts .ISO files just like a physical device -- although in a Virtual machine that support has always been there) - but I find the "SKOOL KIDDY" Mobile phone interface an abomination -- and really have NO plans for using a computer with a touch screen either.

I even TRIED HARD to like it - but it was a losing battle from the start -- especially where the tilee would only work in ONE dimension with a horizontal scrolling -- no hierarchical structure which makes navigating complex menus a pain.

In any case if you tweak your start up services on W7 and have an SSD as the boot disk then W7 doesn't have any performance problems either.

End of Life in 2020 for Windows 7 sounds more likely --especially as even XP is being supported to 2014. I realize Ms is making a push for W8 but there's plenty of individuals and businesses who are saying -- No thanks.

BTW if you like the "Classic" Windows 7 games e.g spider solitaire etc -- for Win 8 you have to get these from the "App store" and the freebies are chucking out annoying commercials at you -- an idea Ms has obviously borrowed from "The Fruit Company".

And as for those ridiculous updating Tile apps : I really don't need also to know the train time table in Lima (Peru) is or any of those "updating" things.

Fine for mobile phones / tablets --but on a desktop computer where I'm doing serious work I don't need these sort of messages appearing randomly messing around with my work -- no thanks.

Cheers
jimbo

Been reading about this in the past few days and even if I don't like it I understand why MS is doing this.

Windows 7 and 8 are both Windows Vista, if you consider the fact that Vista is 6.0, 7 is in fact 6.1 and 8 is 6.2.

Windows Vista was a huge step forward, even if many don't like to admit it but it had huge compatibility problems and it was a pig, in terms of system requirements.

However, Windows 8 comes 3 years after Windows 7 and 1 year and a half after Windows 7 SP1.
So it is somehow understandable that MS decided to add improvements and new features to Windows 8 instead of releasing a new SP for Windows 7.

To be hones, I was very intrigued by Windows 8 and MS's strategy. The first thing that came through mi mind when I heard that the Start buttons is gone for good and Metro is here to stay, was the selective install we had back in the Windows 95/98 days.
Linux distros have it, OS X has it and Windows had it. Why not use this. Make Metro mandatory on tablets and let the users chose on install if they need it or not. Install it if you must but give the users the possibility to enable/disable it as they see fit.
Then I realized that MS is falling behind on the mobile market and things started to make sense (for me at least and assuming I am not wrong here).
That's why I think MS took such an aggressive approach. They hope that after switching to Windows 8, seeing the similarities between Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8, users will chose WP8 over Android or iOS.
And now add this to the fact that you can have your Windows 8 Metro apps and settings on PC, tablet (RT or x86) and WP.
Now, if this is MS's strategy, a Windows XP scenario is to be avoided at all costs. Even if this means killing Windows 7.

Someone suggested that this will move users away from MS and Windows instead of pushing them to Windows 8.
I can't agree with this, especially when Vista didn't.
Sure, maybe some of us can do this. Start using Linux or OS X. But I doubt everyone (or a large number of users, so large that will determine MS to change it's strategy) will.
If you're a company that relies on Windows and other MS technologies, migrating the entire infrastructure from Windows to Linux or OS X will cost so much that will determine companies to stick with Windows 7 as long as they can and then switch to Windows 8/9 and invest in personnel training.
Of course, small companies might, but if a company is so small, they will probably won't be using MS technologies in the first place.

On the other hand, we have casual users that use a PC for multimedia and gaming.
If you're using Windows for gaming, chances that you'll switch to Linux and OS X are very small.
Also, I can tell you from my own experience that users using Windows for Internet/multimedia usually aren't too good with computers and don't like changes too much.
Those users will stick to Windows 7 as long as they can or they will try to find a way to get over Metro.
I find it more likely that they will try using Metro than switch to Linux (if you have problems with Windows, Linux will kill you for sure) or switch to Mac, if they have the money to do so. But if they don't see a reason to move to Windows 8 I don't see how they will see a reason to switch to OS X.

All these being said, I am thinking that, in the lack of a new SP, casual users will stop installing updates, thinking they will avoid weird problems that may occur because of periodically installed updates (not that most of them usually do) and they will start blaming MS because they have problems, like they always did.

Again, someone suggest that MS will eventually release a new SP, even if it will only contain all updates starting from SP1 till that day, without any performance improvements and/ore new features.
However, I don't recall MS ever doing this so I doubt they will be doing it now, when they try to move users to Windows 8.

That is why I find it more likely that MS will kill Windows 7 as soon as possible, pushing devs to Windows 8, than to face another Windows XP scenario and eventually a slow death on the mobile market.
In the end users will switch to Windows 8, one way or another.

CBM (Commodore Business Machines, makers of the computers some of us flatulent geriatrics cut our eye teeth on) had a similar business model that Micro$not seems to be taking. When technology advances, dive into it whole heartedly and abandon the users of older technology. Look where CBM is today.

Lady Fitzgerald said:

CBM (Commodore Business Machines, makers of the computers some of us flatulent geriatrics cut our eye teeth on) had a similar business model that Micro$not seems to be taking. When technology advances, dive into it whole heartedly and abandon the users of older technology. Look where CBM is today.

Just one problem; W8 technology is like my hairline, it's receding, not advancing.