Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD/ATI Drops Windows XP Support

timothy posted about a year ago | from the sky-is-falling-just-very-slowly dept.

Windows 251

Billly Gates writes "The latest beta drivers for the Catalyst drivers control suite only list Vista as the lowest version they will support. We still have almost a year before Windows XP support finally ends. Will NVidia follow? So if you own a AMD system you will not receive audio, chipset, video, or any other drivers for your XP system and must upgrade or use an outdated legacy version. Looks like another death knell for this very long lasting platform."

cancel ×

251 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Feces fiesta! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144509)

Let's begin the feces fiesta! Your fetid cocks will all enter my repugnant bayer aspirin hole and your disease-ridden cum will mix with my rotten feces! Such a thing! What say you?

Re:Feces fiesta! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144517)

Rob Malda apparently needs to be banned from the site he created.

Re:Feces fiesta! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144839)

Wrong site, this is not eBaum's

Re:Feces fiesta! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145041)

or stileproject

Adaptation to Change (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144513)

for better or worse(windows xp), as long as they can fix their crashy drivers, im cool with their decisions

AMD botnet (0)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#44144769)

Between now and mid-April when Microsoft stops putting out security updates for Windows XP, I bet AMD driver exploits (including WebGL exploits that hit vulnerabilities in Catalyst) are going to be a major way to 0wn the remaining Windows XP PCs.

Dropping AMD/ATI support (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144541)

Is getting more attractive by the day...

Buying AMD (2)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#44144597)

Is getting more attractive by the day...

Ironically I am thinking about buying an ATI card for Linux due to its more open nature(Not intel open), so long term support is built into it. Perhaps AMD is only partly responsible.

Re: Buying AMD? choose cheap old card (3, Informative)

xiando (770382) | about a year ago | (#44144721)

Make sure you buy an older card. The free software driver driver for 7000+ cards is a broken joke. Works well for older cards, though. Evil proprietary drivers does sort-of work alright with newer cards but doesn't support older cards. Also know that you can't use 1 old and 1 new card since free driver only works with old cards and proprietary only new.

Re:Buying AMD (1, Troll)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#44144867)

I've been an AMD/ATI guy for a very long time... but AMD/ATI has really gotten bad over the past few years. Driver support in Linux is terrible, but I don't really do gaming in Linux anyway... but worse, their support for Hardware Accelerated video decoding is a nightmare. I finally gave up on it with my Media PC and bought my first Nvidia card in 10 years a few months ago. I plugged it in and Hardware Acceleration just worked. I didn't have to do a damned thing. Then there's their Multi-monitor support which sucks, feels tacked on, and again when you go try the same thing with Nvidia, it just works right out of the box. So now I'm done with ATI. I wish they hadn't failed, but they did.

Re:Buying AMD (0)

poly_pusher (1004145) | about a year ago | (#44144967)

I admire that you put up with it for so long... I loved AMD. The X2 was an amazing processor for it's time. I abandoned AMD processors after waiting for Barcelona and went with the Core 2. I abandoned AMD/ATI cards after the 5000 series. Really it is very sad. Regarding their graphics, their hardware and architecture has always been really interesting. However, their drivers have been abysmal. They have done a pretty good job with gaming products in the recent past but I used to also buy their Firepro products. I switched to their gaming cards which ironically was an improvement "Workstation cards like Quadros and Firepro's are generally slower at most things... Sigh..." and eventually abandoned the Firepro's for Nvidia gaming cards. As an example, when I switched from my 5870 to the GTX 480, I was able to handle 10 times the amount of geometry in my 3D application with the same framerate. It would take a lot of convincing for me to buy another card from them.

Re:Dropping AMD/ATI support (0)

ButchDeLoria (2772751) | about a year ago | (#44144889)

Not for this reason though. XP loses its security updates in less than a year now. Anyone that hasn't moved to Win7 or Win8 should, and if they can't they either need a newer computer or to use Ganoo/Loonix.

Meh. (5, Insightful)

pushing-robot (1037830) | about a year ago | (#44144543)

If you're buying the latest and greatest gaming cards, you're probably going to want DirectX 10 or 11, good multicore support, and an OS that can handle more than 3-ish GB of RAM.

Re:Meh. (1, Troll)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44144591)

If you're buying the latest and greatest gaming cards, you're probably going to want DirectX 10 or 11, good multicore support, and an OS that can handle more than 3-ish GB of RAM.

XP supports older games like unreal tournament 1. Even now new games still have some XP support because gamers still use it for compatibility reasons or they hate change and assume XP is supperior to longhorn.

After slashdoters wrote posts like WIndows 7 == Vista SP 2 they had an effect. Many assume WIndows 7 must suck too because that lie was repeated so many times everywhere by XP loyalists. Many are hesitant to change thinking it is just as slow and bloated and that somehow XP will run faster 100% of the time (not understanding algorithm changes and extra optimizations from the compiler added to the kernel for newer cpus).

But this is bad as AMD based boards come with ethernet, wifi, and other devices that wont work with XP at all.

Re:Meh. (2)

Ardyvee (2447206) | about a year ago | (#44144665)

That is mostly a non-issue nowadays if you consider Virtual Machines are a thing (and as far as I know you don't install AMD/NVidia drivers on the VM), and that gog.com is a thing. I do get your point, though.

Re:Meh. (1)

pellik (193063) | about a year ago | (#44145093)

If you have a second video card and a processor which supports VT-d, you can get solid performance on games in a VM by installing AMD/NVidia drivers. Losing XP support really impacts this (admittedly tiny) segment of the market.

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144667)

I am using a near brand new AMD 900 something based system, lets take a look

Networking - realtek
Sound - realtek
USB3 - entron

nope no problems here with those pesky AMD only devices

Re:Meh. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144677)

After slashdoters wrote posts like WIndows 7 == Vista SP 2 they had an effect. Many assume WIndows 7 must suck too because that lie was repeated so many times everywhere by XP loyalists. Many are hesitant to change thinking it is just as slow and bloated and that somehow XP will run faster 100% of the time (not understanding algorithm changes and extra optimizations from the compiler added to the kernel for newer cpus).

I think you're living in an alternate reality. Most people find Windows 7 to be an extremely good version of Windows and it was highly praised at launch. The majority of consumers have moved to 7 and the stragglers at this point are mostly corporate customers who have apps that require XP. Windows 8 and 8.1 haven't had much traction though.

That said, Windows XP is 5 versions and 12 years old. I really liked using XP, but nothing lasts forever.

Re:Meh. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145099)

"That said, Windows XP is 5 versions and 12 years old. I really liked using XP, but nothing lasts forever."

Why the hell not?

Re:Meh. (3, Interesting)

causality (777677) | about a year ago | (#44144743)

After slashdoters wrote posts like WIndows 7 == Vista SP 2 they had an effect. Many assume WIndows 7 must suck too because that lie was repeated so many times everywhere by XP loyalists. Many are hesitant to change thinking it is just as slow and bloated and that somehow XP will run faster 100% of the time (not understanding algorithm changes and extra optimizations from the compiler added to the kernel for newer cpus).

I seriously doubt that Joe Sixpack goes running to Slashdot for advice on which OS to purchase. Joe Sixpack just uses whatever comes with his new computer. If the latest shiniest Windows sales are down it's because desktop computer sales in general are down. Making Windows go faster is no longer the prime reason to buy a new machine like it was when we referred to it as Wintel.

I did briefly try Win 7 because it came with a then-new laptop I purchased. I was impressed, actually. For Windows, it was great. For Windows, anyway. Sadly, copyright issues alone would prevent MS from ever offering a comprehensive centralized package manager comparable to what Linux distros offer. Having to track down hardware drivers (at all, ever) is a nuisance. Being treated like a dumb user at every turn is definitely a nuisance. The fact that good relatively common-sense security practices are not enough to prevent malware is a showstopper for me. Not being able to poke around under the hood and configure damned near everything, well that sucks. So little choice in desktop environments sucks too. Needing additional software to do what are nowadays basic things (like GOOD remote access, a compiler, etc) that are standard features on *nix is a nuisance. PowerShell is too little, too late compared to what Bash and its predecessors have done for decades (!) now. A binary registry is simply a bad design decision. And while you may find some sense of community among other Windows users, you will not share that with the people who actually put it together.

Slashdot users are more likely to care about some, or all of these things, or something along the lines, than the mass market that drives Windows sales. Here, you may have a point. But every last Slashdotter could boycott Windows forever and it would be a rounding error in terms of MS sales figures. That doesn't explain why Win 7 hasn't skyrocketed the way XP did. It's either ignorant or dishonest for you to pretend that it does.

Re:Meh. (2)

Martin Blank (154261) | about a year ago | (#44144809)

Microsoft does a fairly good job at maintaining a generally usable driver set available through Windows Update. It's usually not the latest version (and often is a generic driver from a few years ago), but it works. They have an additional problem if it comes from their servers, they get blamed if something goes wrong. Hence the testing and stability requirements before it goes into the repository, because if they break a million systems with a bad driver update, it hits the news even if it is a comparatively rare impact.

I tend to agree with your other points, though if Linux actually reached a critical level of use, its security practices would start getting tested, too. Attackers love to see Linux systems because they're trusted to be secure, a trust which is often violated. You seem to know what you're doing, but the corporate Linux uses that I've seen have relied on poor understanding of how they should be maintained, often based on arrogant declarations from the sysadmins who do things like boast of not having rebooted the web server in two years.

Re:Meh. (0)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#44145077)

While Linux is technically better in some areas, the commercial push and the huge ecosystem of HW and SW vendors generally make Windows work much better. The command line is simply not needed that much in Windows because the various graphical tools for configuring things [windowsnetworking.com] are more advanced. What comes to PowerShell, you really have to adapt from the UNIX world and find out the PS way of doing things. Especially the object oriented data manipulation has a different feeling to it. They have done some nice things to modernize the CLI and some parts of PowerShell actually are more highly developed than Bash. However I completely agree that a package management system would greatly improve Windows.

Re:Meh. (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about a year ago | (#44144827)

Windows 7 was more or less Vista SP2. However, by the time 7 had come out, many of the criticisms of Vista no longer applied.

Re:Meh. (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44144879)

but you can run ut1 just fine on win7/win8.
a bunch of win98 stuff runs better on win7/win8 than on xp ever.

not that you really need the latest cards/drivers for old stuff anyways.

Re:Meh. (3, Informative)

ildon (413912) | about a year ago | (#44144913)

Maybe 3 years ago this was true, but at this point I literally know zero gamers that still run Windows XP. And I know a lot of WoW players who haven't upgraded their PCs in years. Just look at the Steam hardware survey [steampowered.com] . Windows XP is sitting at ~8% when you combine 32 and 64 bit versions.

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144605)

You definitely are now, since the new consoles are coming around. PC game requirements seem to be somewhat related to console requirements. The new consoles:
- Support DX10/11 features
- Have 8 GB of RAM instead of 512 MB

Over 8% of Gamers use XP on Steam (0)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#44144705)

If you're buying the latest and greatest gaming cards, you're probably going to want DirectX 10 or 11, good multicore support, and an OS that can handle more than 3-ish GB of RAM.

XP had a 64-bit version and supported multi-core since service pack 2 :). That said I am getting a great gaming experience using Linux...OpenGL...on an Intel Onboard.(and judging by Steam hardware survey I'm not alone).

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc [steampowered.com] Steam Hardware survey is a fun read...It list XP as Having over 8% marketshare of Gamers (Everyone gets about 20% XP Marketshare) http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201205-201305 [statcounter.com]

Re:Over 8% of Gamers use XP on Steam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144773)

That said I am getting a great gaming experience using Linux...OpenGL...on an Intel Onboard.(and judging by Steam hardware survey I'm not alone).

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc [steampowered.com] Steam Hardware survey is a fun read...It list XP as Having over 8% marketshare of Gamers (Everyone gets about 20% XP Marketshare) http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201205-201305 [statcounter.com]

You can't now that. There's no stats for Linux.

Re:Over 8% of Gamers use XP on Steam (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about a year ago | (#44144813)

In the statscounter data, where is Android in the "Operating System" chart? IOS is there at 3.18% and if you select the "Mobile OS" chart, Android is higher than IOS. So where is Android in the Operating System chart?

Re:Meh. (3, Insightful)

causality (777677) | about a year ago | (#44144707)

If you're buying the latest and greatest gaming cards, you're probably going to want DirectX 10 or 11, good multicore support, and an OS that can handle more than 3-ish GB of RAM.

This is a complete slow-news-day non-story. It's just a more specific way of saying "nothing lasts forever".

The headline should have been "Nothing Lasts Forever and XP Won't Be the First Exception" or maybe "For-Profit Corporation Doesn't Want to Support Dying Platform". Not exactly surprising, informative, or newsworthy.

Probably wanted to drop pre-WDDM (4, Informative)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#44144851)

Also, there's an important point here which isn't being addressed in the summary.
Vista and later (all NT 6.x versions) use a new "WDDM" driver model for video drivers. Although there are various characteristics of WDDM, the really defining one is that only a tiny shim that basically wraps the direct hardware access lives in kernel mode. Everything else - the actual program logic of the video driver - lives in user mode. This is fantastic for a number of reasons:
1) All the crash-prone code is now user-mode. When a XP video driver crashes, it causes a bluescreen. When a Win7 video driver crashes, it causes a blank screen for about a second while the user-mode driver restarts.
2) Updating and rolling back video drivers no longer requires a reboot; in fact, it only takes a couple seconds. It's actually practical, if you really want to, to switch video drivers between games (for example, if the latest and "greatest" doesn't work with one of your older games, but you want to use it for everything else).
3) Developing and debugging user-mode code is a lot easier than doing the same for kernel-mode code. This change lets developers spend a greater portion of their time improving the driver logic, rather than making the driver work with the various configurations of the NT kernel.

My guess is that AMD decided the benefits of item #3 were worth more than continuing to release drivers for 12-year-old OS. By no longer maintaining the pre-WDDM version, they can focus their resources on supporting modern platforms that are also easier to develop for.

Re:Probably wanted to drop pre-WDDM (-1, Troll)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year ago | (#44144955)

You count the age of an OS by the last date it was distributed. Not the first.

Re:Probably wanted to drop pre-WDDM (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145133)

" Although there are various characteristics of WDDM, the really defining one is that only a tiny shim that basically wraps the direct hardware access lives in kernel mode. Everything else - the actual program logic of the video driver - lives in user mode."

Isn't this what we had in the pre-KMS days of xorg?

not entirely.. (4, Interesting)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44144551)

..just because the system is an amd system doesn't get any new/bugfixed drivers, the summary makes it sound like you can't get new network controller drivers for your intel nic if you are running it an amd system..("or any other drivers").

I'm more surprised that they were still producing new drivers for xp, actually, than them dropping the support. it's not like they, or nvidia, are known to bringing on package mentioned features to older cards by driver updates even.

as always, you're only certain to get what you get when you buy the thing.. trusting them to bring newer features to older cards newer worked out.

Re:not entirely.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144557)

Well, XP is 12 years old now. What to say...

XP service Pack 3 only replace by Vista Jan30 2007 (0)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#44144663)

Well, XP is 12 years old now. What to say...

XP service Pack 3(XP was awful pre service pack 2 and delayed Vista for years) only had replaced by Vista Jan30 2007 and only then was not a viable replacement (XP continued to be sold on Netbooks)...many people only had sensible replacement in Windows 7 in October 22, 2009, even so many wireless cards and scanners still are not supported, and Windows 7 simply is too bloated to run comfortably on i915 and below. It was one of the reasons for the Vista Disaster. (Ironically being repeated with Windows 8.X only this time because of Metro).

You measure support from End on Life not the start of it.

Re:not entirely.. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144601)

Oh no, my old laptop will no longer be able to play the latest games! Oh wait, it never could handle anything past Sim City 3000 anyway...

Non-story (4, Interesting)

Phroggy (441) | about a year ago | (#44144559)

So if you own a AMD system you will not receive audio, chipset, video, or any other drivers for your XP system and must upgrade or use an outdated legacy version.

Ummm, yeah. Microsoft is going to stop releasing security patches for the OS. If you're still running XP, using older video drivers should be the least of your concerns.

Except that is not hapening yet (1, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#44144641)

Ummm, yeah. Microsoft is going to stop releasing security patches for the OS. If you're still running XP, using older video drivers should be the least of your concerns.

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/endofsupport.aspx [microsoft.com] except that is not happening for another year. The initial date (although I suspect it will be pushed back) April 8 2014.

Its also the date of the end of support for Office 2003. Most of the i915 and above machines (with 1GB of Memory) should simply be moved to Ubuntu and Libreoffice.

But the reality is as the summery states AMD are jumping the gun on this.

Re:Except that is not hapening yet (2)

rabbit994 (686936) | about a year ago | (#44144761)

It's not going to be pushed back. It's already been pushed back once as it should have ended in 2011 (10 years after release date) and it's less then 12 months till April 2014 so yes, less then year.

XP is finished and Microsoft is determined to take it out back and shoot it. At this point, I can't really blame them. Which happened first, 9/11 or XP GA date? XP GA. Mainstream Linux Kernel was 2.2 branch. If you tried to get support for an application on Linux 2.2 these days, everyone would laugh you out of support channel and Red Hat would require a crap ton of money. Yet people expect drivers manf, software developers and Microsoft to support it Windows XP.

Re:Except that is not hapening yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144941)

If you tried to get support for an application on Linux 2.2 these days, everyone would laugh you out of support channel and Red Hat would require a crap ton of money.

See, that's why you use a stable distro!
Debian FTW!!!
Upgrades?! We don't need no stinking upgrades!

except when there's a security bug (3, Insightful)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | about a year ago | (#44144695)

It won't really be a problem if you're not running into security problems. However, if someone finds a way to use the video driver to get SYSTEM or Administrator access to your computer, you'd really want the vendor of said video driver to come with an update. Since MicroSoft is still supporting the OS in terms of security updates, you'd expect the video driver vendor to do the same.

Mind you, just because there's no XP support in the latest beta driver doesn't mean AMD won't fix security flaws if those would arise. It's pure speculation to suggest that something like that might or might not happen. I have a gut feeling that the people at AMD would be smart enough to at least just fix the bug and do a minor version bump if something like that would happen in the period that MicroSoft still supports XP.

Re:except when there's a security bug (5, Funny)

Rockoon (1252108) | about a year ago | (#44144823)

This is XP that we are talking about, where people nearly universally run it as administrator.

Using a display driver exploit on XP is like using C4 explosive to open a screen door.

Re:except when there's a security bug (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144995)

This is XP that we are talking about, where people nearly universally run it as administrator.

The same is true of Vista and 7. Probably 8 too.

Re:except when there's a security bug (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145029)

No, modern versions of Windows have only unprivileged users by default. "Administrators" is the equivalent of the sudoers or wheel group on *nix.

Re:except when there's a security bug (1)

petermgreen (876956) | about a year ago | (#44145125)

That may be true for home users but in many office and education situations it's common to see locked down accounts on XP

Re:except when there's a security bug (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44144893)

I seriously doubt that many people are running WebGL on xp. seriously. other than that, if you're running code that gets to talk to the gpu in feasibly exploitable way, there's no need for the process to exploit bugs in the gpu drivers anyways.

only 11 years too late (0)

nopainogain (1091795) | about a year ago | (#44144563)

i should have read this the same week i read "US Invades Iraq again". Microsoft: Most Intelligent Customers Realize Our Software Only Fools Teenagers.

Re:only 11 years too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144609)

It also fools idiots that wear suits for a living.

XP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144579)

MOVE ON PEOPLE

Ugh. Another Timothy Lord post (3, Insightful)

RR (64484) | about a year ago | (#44144581)

Total non-issue. If you're still using Windows XP, then you're also stuck on DirectX 9 and all the other outdated technologies. New code means new risks, which you're avoiding by sticking to Windows XP, anyway. Also, the submission is wrong; this affects only the Catalyst drivers, which handle video and HDMI audio.

Then I noticed that this is a timothy story. Sometimes I think he posts the most inane story submissions just to get the Slashdot readers all riled up and posting comments, thus generating hits and ad revenues.

Re:Ugh. Another Timothy Lord post (3, Informative)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44144611)

Catalyst includes AMD chipset drivers as well. I use it on my AMD based system.

Re:Ugh. Another Timothy Lord post (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144741)

It sez that "Billy Gates" submitted it.

Re:Ugh. Another Timothy Lord post (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145005)

timothy is the editor who approved the submission. stories don't magically hit the front page on their own (like as is the case with reddit, digg, etc.). editors have the power to spot-check the summaries, which they ought to be doing, but as has been the case with slashdot for its entire existence, they only edit very infrequently.

I think OP misunderstood something (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144583)

Just because there's AMD/ATI in your computer it doesn't mean that audio and chipset peripherals are involved in that. Sheesh.

Where is the problem here? (3, Insightful)

Bearhouse (1034238) | about a year ago | (#44144613)

If you have an XP system, you either:
1. Have an old hack that you are never going to update, since it just works, or
2. Are a corp user with (hopefully) a decent tech team which will ensure you don't buy & support hardware where this will be an issue...

Or (obscure security-related issues aside) am I missing something?

Re:Where is the problem here? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144659)

3: Using it in a virtual machine because it is lightweight (works well in 512MB of RAM), runs Web browsers, and even though it has its security issues, a tool like SandboxIE does help things.

With the primary source of computer compromise being the Web browser, it is only prudent to run the Web browsers in as isolated environment as possible, either sandboxed, in a VM, or both. Also, this guarentees that any "supercookies" and such are long gone when a session is done, since the complete filesystem is rolled back to a previous snapshot.

Re:Where is the problem here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145113)

That sounds desperate. :/

20% of users still use XP (2)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#44144717)

http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201205-201305 [statcounter.com] you will be one in five users who have not updated from XP

People aren't updating because computers are expensive, Intel and Microsoft take all the profits and walk away with a gross profit margin of over 70%...and new versions of the Microsoft Windows software, are poor tablet interfaces.

Re:20% of users still use XP (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about a year ago | (#44145089)

Computers are expensive? Really? When I'll bet those same people are willing to drop $500-600+tax for a console. They don't want to spend the $400-600 to build themselves a new computer. Yep, genius level thinking there.

Re:Where is the problem here? (1)

xiando (770382) | about a year ago | (#44144745)

You're missing this: If you have an old Windows XP system and a old graphics card and your harddrive breaks but you want to keep using it and your friend gives you a new harddrive then you'll need graphics drivers.. but they are gone from AMDs website and now you're screwed. You have to use the not-exactly-perfect free drivers for old cards in Linux since support is removed from AMDs proprietary driver and it's hard/impossible to get old versions of it.

Old AMD Catalyst drivers pretty easy to find (2)

iYk6 (1425255) | about a year ago | (#44144787)

Find old versions right here: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/windows/previous/Pages/radeonaiw_xp.aspx [amd.com]

I went to AMD's driver site, which I found with the google search, "amd catalyst download". I clicked on "Windows XP (32 bit)". Then I clicked on "Previous Drivers and Software."

Re:Old AMD Catalyst drivers pretty easy to find (1)

Hsien-Ko (1090623) | about a year ago | (#44144821)

Even today you could still get drivers for their Rage line of cards.

And if it's about older hardware i.e. a retro XP system for playing troublesome games like Republic Commando, then this news holds no relevance.

Also Windows 7 can run a LOT of the stuff XP can just fine. DOS games play nicely in DOSBox (and XP's ntvdm sucks for DOS even with that VDMSound hack anyway). What DOESN'T play nicely is anything needing a fullscreen 8bpp video mode, which can be partially resolved by wrappers for DirectX, but that doesn't cover the rest of the games that just do it through GDI or *shudder* Scitech MGL. This was also a problem for earlier versions of Windows NT as it reserved 0 and 255 indexes, XP took a few more for the start button, and then Vista and 7 took much more.

Re:Old AMD Catalyst drivers pretty easy to find (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#44144863)

Already commented here, but please, mod parent up. The drivers aren't gone, they just aren't going to be updated anymore.

Vista and later will download video drivers (not latest-and-greatest, but well-tested versions) from Windows Update; I've forgotten whether XP does that as well or not. I don't use MacOS 9, and I don't use XP.

Re:Where is the problem here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144799)

Nope. AMD offers 'legacy' drivers off their site. You can download older versions.

and even if they didnt.... http://www.oldversion.com/ does.

Re:Where is the problem here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144945)

AMD isn't the only one offering Catalyst drivers, you can just grab the Sapphire versions who have a history of keeping legacy drivers available even after new versions are out.

Re:Where is the problem here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144963)

Or look on the torrents. I'm sure somebody would torrent and perhaps boost their share ratio amongst all the numerous XP boxen. Since the company isn't supporting XP anymore (and when they did, they didn't charge anything), I'm fairly certain they wouldn't care too much if somebody else puts the drivers out there.

Anyhow, there's a lot of old stuff for the pickings if you know what to look for. Hell, you could probably find Win98 stuff to get a 15 year old computer working if for some strange reason you really wanted to.

Re:Where is the problem here? (1)

Coppit (2441) | about a year ago | (#44145007)

3) ... or you're Chinese.

Re:Where is the problem here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145063)

Or you have no reason to upgrade.

is that my unichrome in the trash there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144619)

Oh windows world. Always doing things half-assed. When linux dropped unichrome driver development, they obliterated the legacy support as well. Maybe we can try again with Vista in a few years.

If it works, why worry. (4, Insightful)

chromaexcursion (2047080) | about a year ago | (#44144645)

XP systems are older systems. You haven't been able to buy XP for years.
How many people have XP systems and are buying new graphics cards?
If it still works, who cares.

If you've hit something where the graphics drivers are obsolete, there's probably a lot more wrong.

keeping up with advances and supporting older systems is EXPENSIVE. AMD made a cost decision, it's not worth it.

Re:More than Graphics (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144675)

Hospitals, schools, and many corporations buy the latest and greatest and then image XP on them and expect them to work. ATI Catalyst is the driver mechanism for all AMD hardware now. Not just video cards.

Ethernet cards, chipsets, and other AMD hardware require ATI catalyst drivers to function properly as they are bundled with it.

Many buy AMD hardware because it is cheaper and a better value than a crappy icore3 when they want more than 2 cores for their staff.

Re:More than Graphics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144715)

this is simply not true, amd board do not come with amd network cards or other support hardware, its a core chipset that run 100% stable using standard generic microsoft drivers, its realtek network and sound cards, and generic non discript USB controllers

you can load XP on a brand new amd machine without ever loading the catalyst and have it run just fucking fine

now quit running your bitch hole billygates, why did you have to repeat this FUD 5 fucking times in the same thread? Small penis complex?

Re:More than Graphics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145139)

Are you ~gl4ss?

Re:If it works, why worry. (0)

kesuki (321456) | about a year ago | (#44144719)

you apparently don't shop online much because http://3btech.net/deop745smfof3.html [3btech.net] is still new xp hardware, albeit a $89 pc.

Re:If it works, why worry. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144727)

what does a 5 year old USED computer have to do with the availability of buying XP?

Re:If it works, why worry. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144795)

Yes a refurb/used machine... that counts as a new machine. It comes with the OEM license that initially came with the system when it was new 6-7 years ago, not exactly a new license, any one still selling new Windows XP have their leftovers from when Microsoft stop selling them 3 years ago.

Re:If it works, why worry. (1)

the_humeister (922869) | about a year ago | (#44145229)

You have a strange definition of "new". That thing has a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 chip, which is only twice as powerful as the processor in my phone (Cortex A9 based) but uses 100x more power.

Re:If it works, why worry. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145043)

XP systems are older systems. You haven't been able to buy XP for years. How many people have XP systems and are buying new graphics cards?

I'm one of the 1-in-5 people who runs XP. My current card is an nVidia GTX 560Ti, which is not state-of-the-art by today's standards, but runs extremely cool, performs amazingly well, and is quiet.

The problem with people jumping on the "who cares about XP support?" bandwagon is that they're not really thinking pragmatically. I run XP for a lot of damn good reasons: issues/bugs/problems I have with Windows 7 that keep me from moving to it are in the low hundreds -- no joke, no exaggeration, the count is in the hundreds. Microsoft has had almost 5 years to fix the problems, they're well-known and disclosed/discussed everywhere, but they remain. And if you think Microsoft will fix them -- they won't. Instead, the attitude will become "move to Windows 8". Surely you can see the problem with this mentality/approach?

The situation is dire and is not just related to AMD/ATI. Let me give you a real example: my motherboard is an LGA1155 board made only a few years ago, driven by the Intel Z77 Express chipset (also quite recent). The board has a UEFI-based BIOS as well (shows you how recent it is) but works fine with XP. The Z77 Express chipset has support for AHCI, as I'm sure you can guess -- however, Intel stopped releasing AHCI drivers that work on XP (the .INF files lack 2K/XP definitions in them, and the .SYS files won't work on XP for whatever reason) as of February 2013. They have since released AHCI drivers with fairly important/major bugfixes, but since they removed XP support, nobody running XP can get these improvements/bugfixes. There is nothing technical that limits those bugfixes to Windows 7/8 either -- the decision is not a technical one.

The driving force is not what's technical -- those AHCI driver bugs, for example, can be fixed in 2K/XP/Vista/7/8 all at once -- but instead what Microsoft mandates given their bad attitude/complete disconnect from reality these days.

Now step back a moment and think about the implications of failed hardware -- if nVidia does what AMD/ATI does, what happens when my video card dies and I can't find a replacement that has XP drivers? Same with my motherboard, and any other hardware. I'm then forced to switch to an OS that I choose not to use (for good/legit reasons).

While I truly understand the POV that consists of "you're using something made 13 years ago, you need to upgrade", the problem is that there is no *actual technical justification* to upgrade. Instead, what we have today is a market driven by "PC enthusiast" mentality -- kids who apparently have money falling out of their pockets, who buy entire new 4-digit-priced systems every 6 months, and as such the industry assumes that is the norm and caters to that. Well it isn't the norm -- some of us actually prefer OSes that allow us to get shit done, and not have to fight with gimped or badly-designed UIs or "security features" that make you think the OS itself knows better than you do. Some of us prefer UIs that are configurable in every way (you cannot do this on 7, believe it or not -- there are many things relating to Themes that operate as no-ops). Instead, the rebuttals I read are "XP is old, it must die" when there is really no actual technical justification for it. There's a reason people stick with it: it works, it doesn't get in our way, and it's a platform we know will run the software we use. And people who say "just use a Windows XP VM" or "use XP Mode in 7" have never actually used it heavily -- yes, it makes lots of sense to boot into Windows 7, only to immediately run XP Mode and then use that as your OS... Anyone who has tried to do this knows how/why it doesn't work effectively.

Microsoft's driving force, in case you haven't noticed, is akin to that of "brogrammers" who latch on to the latest trendy programming language. It's as if Microsoft's engineers -- the guys who do everything EXCEPT the kernel -- get bored of "the old way" and decide to screw around with new toys, then those toys become everyone else's (consumers) problem. I would say at least 60% of what I've seen in Windows 7 and Windows 8 are "change for the sake of change/to relieve someone's boredom", and not "change for the sake of improvement". The one area of Windows which is the exception is the kernel: the 7 and 8 kernel are actually quite good -- it's all the rest of what makes Windows what it is that's buggered. Stuff nobody, not even third-party software authors, can fix.

Sorry, but I could rant about this for months. It's the sign of a very broken and disconnected market, where a single demographic is being used as the sole focus of justification for actions.

Re:If it works, why worry. (0)

damnbunni (1215350) | about a year ago | (#44145145)

You want the 'actual technical reason' to stop supporting Windows XP in those updates?

There's a perfectly good one!

Here it is:

Technically, we're tired of paying programmers to support it.

Support was already bad (1)

Milharis (2523940) | about a year ago | (#44144697)

I've recently bought an AMD card, and it had rendering errors in XP, although it was with a 2004 game.
Upgrading to 7 fixed the issue.

So support for newer cards on XP was already rather poor.

Re:Support was already bad (1)

Dputiger (561114) | about a year ago | (#44144735)

This is a known issue with both NV and AMD cards. Old games aren't tested to ensure compatibility with new drivers. It's not surprising that a nine year old game had trouble on a modern card in an ancient operating system. If you name the title, I might be able to dig up some advice on it.

Re:Support was already bad (1)

Milharis (2523940) | about a year ago | (#44144779)

It was Rome Total War.
Upgrading to 7 was both needed and an improvement, so nothing of value was lost.

They should at least make a basic driver (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about a year ago | (#44144729)

Had that problem when everything went 64 bit OS. I had an Epson scanner, and they made no 64 bit drivers for any older device. Suddenly every old device became useless. It's not like a new scanner is that much better than an old one. Just make a basic driver so you can at least get hardware to function.

Re:They should at least make a basic driver (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44144915)

that's a backwards problem from this.
you're asking for them to provide drivers for old ati cards for windows 8...

oh and there is a basic mode, you just wont get accelaration of any kind.

Re:They should at least make a basic driver (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44145201)

the SANE-epson driver supports many epson scanners under Linux

XP is Zombie (1)

turkeydance (1266624) | about a year ago | (#44144739)

XP is Legend. old Richard Matheson reference.

Keyword: Beta Driver (5, Informative)

rsmith-mac (639075) | about a year ago | (#44144807)

The submitter is reading too much into this. The drivers linked are beta drivers - this is not the first time AMD hasn't published an XP version of a beta driver, due to the relatively low number of XP users on 5000/6000/7000 series video cards (all of which are post-Win7). XP is supported by the current WHQL certified driver (13.4) and I expect the next certified driver will support XP, too. If and when AMD does drop XP support they'll announce it a couple of versions ahead of time, just as they did for Win9x and Win2K.

people still use XP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144857)

i don't think i've seen any new computers that come with Windows XP. even the new netbooks come with Microsoft Windows 7 Starter Edition 32-bit operating system preinstalled.

just asking. was wondering when drivers were going to stop supporting Windows XP.

Only them left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44144927)

Only terrorists and elder people still use winxp anyways. Those usually don't mind about graphic drivers updates.

Probably a non-issue (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | about a year ago | (#44144931)

There are a few reasons more likely than the simply no longer supporting XP at all:

* Perhaps this release changes nothing that is relevant to XP. Perhaps all the changes are in codepaths only touched under DX10 or later which is irrelevant to XP.

* Perhaps the early testing was done on limited systems. OK so it is odd for a platform to be ignored in beta tests, but I perhaps if the expected impact on XP is low or zero (see above) they didn't publically release the alpha for XP and someone forgot to update the release details for the beta.

... to state two.


While XP's market share is dropping rapidly now, there are still plenty of home installs out there - plenty enough that ATI/AMD aren't going to risk creating uproar by not supporting them until the official death date from MS (April next year).

Re:Probably a non-issue (1)

petermgreen (876956) | about a year ago | (#44145167)

Another important thing to remember is that the display driver model was overhauled between XP and Vista. So afaict while they are packaged up in the same installer the XP driver and the Vista+ driver are really two different drivers. While i'm sure there will be some shared code I suspect that a heck of a lot of the code is specific to either the "XPDM" driver or the "WDDM" driver.

Does this matter?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145009)

old machines running XP probably won't run the latest games anyway. the old drivers will run just fine on XP, for as long as they exist. There is no reason they need to support new cards or new features.

Asking for windows XP support is like asking for kernel 2.4 support in linux.

nvidia is great in that they allow you to download old versions of the drivers for older cards on their website, as the old versions are also available in most linux distros.

But really, the driver you use now, with the computer you use now, with the graphics card you use now is going to work. And if you re-install you should be able to get working drivers installed.

Your not going to install a new machine with brand new hardware and windows XP.

and if you do, you should be able to find old video cards lying around long than you'll get support for Windows XP.

This is a false dillema, I also hope no one is crying over loosing Linux Kernel 2.4 support, which came out around the same time as XP

Irrelevant news for nerds (1)

heteromonomer (698504) | about a year ago | (#44145035)

Stop this shit Windows XP news. It's 2013. Why is this relevant news for nerds? I mean come on editors! Is this submission better than so many other worthy submissions? How many of us care about this crap? Stop assuming that most of us are some XP support drones looking for jobs on Dice.com. Many of us are scientists, engineers etc in various fields.

Re:Irrelevant news for nerds (3, Insightful)

epyT-R (613989) | about a year ago | (#44145065)

..and at least one of us is a myopic projectionist who is unable to see past his own shit.

Re:Irrelevant news for nerds (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44145209)

I use windows XP for doing taxes and running vmware vcenter client for admin of machines remotely.

plenty of tooling, scientific and engineering machines use XP for controller.

arbitrary (1)

epyT-R (613989) | about a year ago | (#44145051)

Seems arbitrary to me. It shouldn't be difficult to maintain the extra package as the code is largely the same anyway. The only thing that changes from 2k/xp to vista/7/8 is the kernel module itself, a tiny part of the whole driver.

Lots of people still use XP, supported or not, and it's stupid to not support the platform even past the OEM's due date. AMD's customer isn't microsoft, it's the people using hardware with their gpus.

Big deal (1)

Waccoon (1186667) | about a year ago | (#44145067)

I've had so many issues with newer Radeon drivers screwing up my system, I stopped updating once I hit Catalyst 12.02. Hardware acceleration under XP-32 is totally broken, IMO.

Last year I bought my first nVidia card in 6 years, and I'm astounded at how many of my old games now work properly. If AMD isn't going to bother making XP drivers that work, they may as well stop updating them.

Old computers with new Cards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44145151)

Most enthusiast gamers go through graphics cards more often than any other pc component. It is also common to keep older computers or parts as you upgrade to new ones. It is therefore not uncommon to have a 7 year old computer (core2duo came out in 2006) running windows xp with a 2 year old graphics card as a secondary gaming machine.

Today this exemption of support for XP might not have a very big impact, but in 2 years we will see problems arise for these users. When people begin to put today's graphics card into their old secondary XP machine they will encounter problems. First they must discover that they need to download old drivers. They then must locate the proper driver version, which may no longer be officially hosted, and difficult to find. Even after installing the newest compatible drivers there may still be problems. Fixes may be released in future driver updates for game specific bugs. The fixes for these games exist but just not in any version of the drivers that you can run. There may be the option of custom modified drivers released by private individuals or groups, which may be of questionable quality or come from dubious sources.

Only the future will tell for certain, but lack of legacy support is something ATI is already familiar with. Anyone with a pre HD* card trying to get decent hardware acceleration with a linux kernel version newer than 3.0 knows that feel.

Death knell for whom? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#44145231)

XP or AMD?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>