Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Windows Upgrades

Microsoft Confirms It Is Dropping Windows 8.1 Support 575

snydeq (1272828) writes "Microsoft TechNet blog makes clear that Windows 8.1 will not be patched, and that users must get Windows 8.1 Update if they want security patches, InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard reports. 'In what is surely the most customer-antagonistic move of the new Windows regime, Steve Thomas at Microsoft posted a TechNet article on Saturday stating categorically that Microsoft will no longer issue security patches for Windows 8.1, starting in May,' Leonhard writes. 'Never mind that Windows 8.1 customers are still having multiple problems with errors when trying to install the Update. At this point, there are 300 posts on the Microsoft Answers forum thread 'Windows 8.1 Update 1 Failing to Install with errors 0x80070020, 80073712 and 800F081F.' The Answers forum is peppered with similar complaints and a wide range of errors, from 800F0092 to 80070003, for which there are no solutions from Microsoft. Never mind that Microsoft itself yanked Windows 8.1 Update from the corporate WSUS update server chute almost a week ago and still hasn't offered a replacement.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Confirms It Is Dropping Windows 8.1 Support

Comments Filter:
  • u wot m8 (Score:5, Informative)

    by Agent ME ( 1411269 ) <> on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:09PM (#46753417)

    Windows 8.1 is no longer supported, so users must update to Windows 8.1?

    • Re:u wot m8 (Score:5, Informative)

      by x0ra ( 1249540 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:12PM (#46753435)
      As I understand it, they must update to "'Windows 8.1 Update 1". A new marketing name for the old "Service Pack" ?
      • by Cryacin ( 657549 )
        Ah, the old recursive update on the operating system!
      • Re:u wot m8 (Score:5, Funny)

        by Mateo_LeFou ( 859634 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:19PM (#46753479) Homepage

        Just thank your lucky stars that you're not in Linux-land, or some other godawful free software environment, 'cause you would have to type

        >apt-get upgrade

        in a terminal. This is obviously way too difficult for any human being, so bless Gates and Ballmer and whoever came after him for letting us not have to type that

        • Re:u wot m8 (Score:5, Funny)

          by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:27PM (#46753507)

          Just thank your lucky stars that you're not in Linux-land, or some other godawful free software environment, 'cause you would have to type

          >apt-get upgrade

          in a terminal. This is obviously way too difficult for any human being, ...

          Don't kid yourself, it would be: apt-get dist-upgrade

          • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

            by Zappy ( 7013 )

            $ apt-get upgrade
            bash: apt-get: command not found...

            Hmm, I think that would be
            $ sudo yum -y update :-)

        • Tsk Tsk. You made it too simple.
          You have to type
          apt-get update
          apt-get upgrade
          you have to wait for a prompt and type Y [RETURN]

        • by Yaur ( 1069446 )
          It's all fun and games until libc needs an update.
        • Re:u wot m8 (Score:4, Funny)

          by tiny69 ( 34486 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @03:47AM (#46754609) Homepage Journal
          I use Slackware, you insensitive clod.
        • by Lumpy ( 12016 )

          This is MCSE's we are talking about, using the keyboard like that is not a part of their training.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 )

      well they released an update that you must get to get updates!

      just another MS win8 era naming fail. how they can fuck up so badly is a miracle.

      (and nevermind that windows 8 is what.. under 2 years old?? and 8.1 is not getting security updates now?? )

    • Re:u wot m8 (Score:4, Informative)

      by squiggleslash ( 241428 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @08:10AM (#46755735) Homepage Journal

      Yes basically the article is saying that any major patches for Windows 8.1 in future will have a dependency upon prior patches being installed. In other words how it's always been since the beginning of time.

  • A friend of mine is coming by this arvo for help with his Windows 8.1 laptop which Windows Update apparently broke.

    Looks like I have some bad news for him... but at least I know *what* to tell him now. Cheers.

    • Re:Now I Know... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:44PM (#46753581) Homepage

      Tell him that M$ have done the same old, same old, attempted to correct their failures in the cheapest way possible by shoving the cost back on consumers. Can't get the upgrade to work, suck it up, format, re-install, repatch, re-upgrade and repatch and the restore you back up data, don't have backups, M$ answer to you, well, that's your fault for trusting their software.

  • by Mateo_LeFou ( 859634 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:09PM (#46753423) Homepage

    "a wide range of errors, from 800F0092 to 80070003, for which there are no solutions from Microsoft."

    Story of our Lives. Here we are.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by jones_supa ( 887896 )
      At least it fails gracefully with a clean error code. In Linux world it would show up as a dialog with corrupted text and a mysterious "Invalid argument" error message written in some log. ;)
    • by dbIII ( 701233 )
      They are all one error really - the FU2 error from Microsoft.
  • by plover ( 150551 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:10PM (#46753427) Homepage Journal

    Apple doesn't support more than one version of iOS. If you want to fix a problem with 6.1.2, you get to go to whatever version is current (7.1). You don't get to go to 6.1.3, you don't get to go to 7.0.5 or 7.0.6, you go to 7.1. Your choice is "upgrade or don't."

    • You should be able to upgrade/downgrade/sidegrade to any version that suits your needs

      • by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:22PM (#46753493)

        and you should accept that down-grading will mean you are vulnerable to any issues later versions have fixed.

      • And when you write your own OS, feel free to support that model. Nobody is stopping you.

      • by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

        There are too many versions and variants of the Microsoft operating system.

        I think that's the explanation why they see failures in the patches, they can't keep track of all permutations that exists.

    • by rsmith-mac ( 639075 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:38PM (#46753547)

      Well you're comparing phones/appliances to computers, so yes.

      Windows has for many years now used a multiple-tier support strategy (the Windows Lifecycle policy []). Microsoft supports an OS for 10 years, and during that period if they issue a service pack then they support the previous sub-version of Windows for 2 years. Windows 8.1 Update is about 30% of a service pack; the update contains a number of feature enhancements and on a code level it becomes a "base" OS that all future updates are built against. So unlike a normal security update, you can't skip Windows 8.1 Update and still get other security updates. This in turn can be interpreted as a violation of the Lifecycle Policy, as it's functionally a service pack and therefore Microsoft should continue providing security updates for Windows 8.1 (sans Update) for 2 years.

      iOS on the other hand offers no such policy. You are expected to use the most recent version of the OS and Apple has never said any differently, full stop.

      Never mind the huge difference between an OS for a disposable device, and an OS for computers that is expected to last for a decade or more and is interfaced with massive amounts of custom hardware and software. Unsurprisingly, the type of device and the expected use case for it is a big factor in how long an OS is supported and how OS updates are handled.

  • Jeez (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vux984 ( 928602 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:10PM (#46753429)

    Just patch windows 8.1 with the update. It makes the OS unequivocally better. Whining about it is just silly.

    • Re:Jeez (Score:5, Informative)

      by x0ra ( 1249540 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:13PM (#46753439)
      unless you *cannot* update because the update is broken...
    • by nhstar ( 452291 )

      If I read it right, the problem is that a number of users are having issues with installing Update 1 and have yet to find solutions... While that really is a problem, I feel that the headline here was meant more to get people bashing some more.


  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:21PM (#46753489)

    They make things so confusing, whoever makes these decisions are the ones that should be fired from Microsoft! Windows 8.1 and Windows 8.1 Update 1. Just name the damn thing 8.2 or Service Pack 1 that everyone is familiar with. Then to top it off Windows 8.1 isn't getting any more updates!!!

    Then you have a pro version, this version and that version!

    Sorry but life is much more simpler in the Mac world! 10.9.0.....10.9.1....10.9.2.......etc. Then you have Delta Updates that are the point releases and Combo updates that will update you from the 10.9.0 to the latest version say 10.9.9 in one download and one install. Then you don't have 200 updates to download and install.

    I think the Microsoft way is superior as you can install/uninstall individual updates incase of problems, but its too complicated!

    • by Megane ( 129182 )
      Life is also simpler in the Mac world because there isn't a triple .NET update every couple of weeks. And the .NET updaters seem to take a lot more time than regular patches. How badly do you have to fuck up a language runtime library to make it need monthly updates? And I'm not talking about just adding new features to the latest one, like with Java. This is .NET 1.x 2.x and 4.x all getting constantly patched.
    • They should have gone with something more meaningful, like 8.6.31-11, and perhaps 8.4.x for the old version of the OS.

  • by Espectr0 ( 577637 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:22PM (#46753495) Journal

    if you have wsus without ssl, it works fine after importing the update from the catalog.

    i don't see the need of ssl on an internal small server, anyway even with ssl you can enable tls 1.2 manually and it will work.

    this article is also misleading, since the update itself is a regular update and not labeled "update 1" or even a service pack, but on every windows version out there there are updates that depend on other updates, especially service packs, so nothing new here.

    • i don't see the need of ssl on an internal small server

      The 1980s called and would like their "my firewall stops ALLLL the hackerz!" approach to security back.

      On the server providing updates to all your Windows systems? Thank goodness you have no authority over my network. All the guys on my team get regular reminders about the importance of defense in depth.

  • Microsoft only support the current service pack level and all those less than 24 months old for Windows Client and Server.
    That's the agreement they've given to their customers.
    They will drop support for 8.1 in 24 months time. [] .... wait a minute. They should at least update their support policy before cutting support.

  • by edibobb ( 113989 ) on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:40PM (#46753559) Homepage
    Why not upgrade from Windows 8.1 to Windows 7?
    • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

      Since there's nothing inherently wrong with Windows 8.1 besides the awful UI, I can't figure why you'd downgrade to Windows 7. Or are you telling me that you can't install another UI and go on your way? I now await people to say that's it's worse than vista, when it's not. Especially when it's main negative feature is the UI.

      • Speak for yourself. I run both Windows 8 and Windows 7 machines, and my Windows 7 machines are demonstrably more stable and less buggy than my Windows 8 one. (Note: I say one because I've had such a piss-poor experience with Windows 8, which rapidly degrades in performance to the point of near-unusability. And even straight out of the box with a fresh install, it likes to do things such as take multiple *minutes* before task manager appears on a core i5 machine with 8GB of RAM and 50% CPU utilization or les
        • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

          Speak for yourself. I run both Windows 8 and Windows 7 machines, and my Windows 7 machines are demonstrably more stable and less buggy than my Windows 8 one.

          So do I. I actually haven't run across an OS quite as stable as this since Win2k, probably my favorite version of windows. My follow up would be XPx64. If it's taking *that* long on a fresh install, you've got something else going on wrong on your system, either ram timings, spread spectrum, or something esoterically weird going on. I've seen exactly that type of issue before in Win7 and XP, and each case it was something different anything between windows itself trying to remotely grab a driver and get

          • If it's taking *that* long on a fresh install, you've got something else going on wrong on your system, either ram timings, spread spectrum, or something esoterically weird going on.

            It sounds like a bad driver or hardware enumeration. But, yes, if windows takes more than a few seconds to get to a login on a SSD based machine (so, what 30-40 seconds on a spinner?) then it's a hardware problem. W8, once I restored the start menu, is no less stable or responsive than my W7 machine. Most of my complaints are over install of OEM versions of the OS that aren't auto-authorized by the bios (most of my machines are Dell, and the Dell OEM OS just installs; no games, no keys, no mess).

            FWIW, my

      • Since there's nothing inherently wrong with Windows 8.1 besides the awful UI

        Perhaps you didn't read the summary.

      • by dbIII ( 701233 )

        I can't figure why you'd downgrade to Windows 7

        To get the same sort of behaviour that users have seen since before Win3.11. As seen with online purchases at HP etc there are certainly people prepared to pay extra for that.

  • I thought this was a joke.
    MS is just so sad
    it hurts
  • So? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sable Drakon ( 831800 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @12:05AM (#46753639)
    How is this any different than MS stating in the past that updates required a certain Service Pack in order to be installed. It's worded very poorly, since everyone is going to assume the worst when you say 'Windows 8.1'. Mainly because they're not calling them service packs anymore or incrementing the updates. Windows 8.1 Update 1 would make more sense to people if they simply called it Windows 8.2.
  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @12:09AM (#46753655)

    Why not go back to the old SP system and stop this mess of a new update system where some stuff is in the windows store and others is in the windows update system.

    As for this not working for all does it have any thing to do with 8.0 to 8.1 being more like a full os upgrade then an SP? and why did make the 8.1 iso not take Windows 8 product keys?

    MS needs to go back to how it used to be with XP, vista, 7. Where it's not lot's of separate updates it is rolled up on to big install that has it all or least offer that as a choice not only for people who say have 2-4+ pc's and don't want to have re download the same updates on each pc but in some cases that combo updates work better.

  • WTF? (Score:5, Funny)

    by bagman1673 ( 1120469 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @12:31AM (#46753773)
    Windows 8.0 was installed on this machine, and it sucked immensely. Then a couple of months ago I got an upgrade to Windows 8.1 courtesy of Windows update, and it hardly sucked at all. Then, a couple of days ago I got my old Windows 8.1 upgraded to new Windows 8.1, and I know it is different because now apps have the big red "X" back in the right hand corner of the window and you can terminate them while they are running. Awesome! At this rate Windows 8.1 will turn into Windows XP around Labor Day. Maybe the boys will rediscover POP3 email at some point.
  • Update worked! (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @12:35AM (#46753791)

    After four tries, the update finally worked. What does it do? I now have an App Store icon in the task bar. Only took some 880 Mbytes to do that.

  • Broke for me... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Retron ( 577778 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @12:39AM (#46753815)

    I installed the update at work - it worked. I installed the update on my old PC - it worked. Tried to install it on my current PC - failed, after taking something like 20 minutes. It then took another half-hour to revert the changes. (On those machines where it worked, it took only 5 minutes or so to install).

    Digging around online showed that fiddling around on the command line with dism might help. The online image is corrupted but it's repairable... that is, until you try and use /restorehealth, at which point it moans that there are no sources. Of course there aren't, it was upgraded to 8.1 from 8.0 via the online store.

    So, after faffing around and grabbing an install.wim from an old 8.1 iso I had saved at work (not the 8.1 update 1 iso currently on the MS website) I find that dism won't use the image, even after mounting it.

    I couldn't then even attempt to reinstall the update, as it failed immediately. Dism was called upon again to remove the update package, then at least it would let me try again... only to fail. Another 45 minutes wasted.

    It looks as though the only way to "fix" it is to nuke Windows entirely, then go through the painful 8.0 > 8.1 > 8.1 with Media Center route. Except, of course, to get Media Center reinstalled you have to buy it again - there's no option I can see to re-enter your Meda Center key again because, guess what, when you upgrade to Media Center your Windows product key is changed. And a Windows 8.1 with Media Center key isn't accepted by the 8.1 iso (or at least wasn't when I tried earlier)...

    Looks like a long and boring Easter weekend coming up.

    On the other hand, I might just reinstall Windows 7 instead.

  • by BlazingATrail ( 3112385 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @12:57AM (#46753899)
    You can upgrade by installing Windows Me, then Vista Ultimate, then enable start menu, disable start menu, 8.0 SP1, Windows ME again but holding ALT-F5 until BSOD appears, then quickly insert the 3.5 floppy with 8.1 patch on it (if you didn't keep a floppy drive.. oh you're so screwed!).
  • 8.1 has received a substantial service release that fixes bugs and enhances the UI (slightly). Why should they support the older version any more? That doesn't excuse them from ensuring the upgrade process is smooth and trouble free but I understand why they are doing this.
  • by LordLimecat ( 1103839 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @03:44AM (#46754591)

    This whole thread is absurd, as are all the people jumping on the "bash MS" bandwagon.

      * Microsoft will continue to support 8.1, and everyone here KNOWS that.
      * Everyone knows that because Microsoft has a bigger problem with having to support old platforms than any other vendor out there. Many posters here generally know this, too, but are being obtuse so that they can harp about Microsoft ending support for a new platform (which isnt even remotely believable).
      * The author of the blog even knows that! The Microsoft technet entry says almost the opposite of what the blogger does-- that 8.1 WILL recieve updates. All he got right is that you do need to install a prereq to get them, like we've seen with countless other OSes. The venerable XP does this, too.
      * Half the people gloating over the "bugginess of Windows" are fans of an OS that is experiencing one of the biggest internet vulnerabilties in about a decade in its SSL stack, but thats OK in their eyes somehow because its not packaged with the OS and therefore theyre allowed to be buggy.
      * Some people are taking the time to smirk about the confusing version numbering of Win8-- which is doubly hillarious given how ridiculous Linux's versioning was until about a year ago.
      * And if I had to guess, the aforementioned problems could possibly be related to the aforementioned heartbleed bug, as we dont know what all was leaked and Microsoft is almost certainly not going to want to go into it.

    But yea, dont let that stop the fun.

    • by Spliffster ( 755587 ) on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @04:46AM (#46754787) Homepage Journal

      The SSL flaw has been fixed and rolled out very quickly, it was not the first and will not be the last. How many known Security flaws for windows, IE and many other Microsoft products are out there, unfixed?

      Could you explain why "Microsoft has a bigger problem with having to support old platforms" than anyone else? They seem to have vast resources and should actually be able to react quicker than others.


ASCII a stupid question, you get an EBCDIC answer.