Skylake + Windows 7 = no USB support?

[vailr]

https://translate.google.com/transl...prime_support_usb_s-13630-a-c.html&edit-text=

Skylake removes USB support in Windows 7

Many details have leaked this morning on Skylake, the next Intel platform, we have learned that the 100 chipset will no longer contain the EHCI support (USB 2.0) xHCI and Windows 7. This means that those who are under Windows 7 will not take advantage of their USB port just.

 

[mikeymikec]

This to me seems like Intel would be saying "do we want to sell to businesses? Nah...".

It would be less of a risky bet if they waited for Win10 RC1 to receive overwhelmingly positive reviews, but even then many businesses won't be too happy with having a mix of Windows platforms to support, IMHO.

 

[sm625]

we have learned that the 100 chipset will no longer contain the EHCI support (USB 2.0) xHCI and Windows 7. This means that those who are under Windows 7 will not take advantage of their USB port just.

"contain the EHCI support (USB 2.0) xHCI and Windows 7" is not correct english. It looks like a butchered translation. Likewise with "their USB port just"

 

[Cerb]

2020 is still 5 years away, and PCs are still being manufactured and packaged with mice, keyboards, and trackpads that are not USB 3.0 incompatible. Must be a translation issue, or just bad info.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

2020 is still 5 years away, and PCs are still being manufactured and packaged with mice, keyboards, and trackpads that are USB 3.0 incompatible. Must be a translation issue, or just bad info.

I'm inclined to agree. It could just mean they're removing the old EHCI controllers (native USB 2.0) from the PCH. This isn't a problem because the Intel xHCI controller is fully backwards compatible with USB 2.0.

It might make a few problems with 7 installation from USB devices, as 7 does not have a built-in xHCI controller driver...

 

[Ken g6]

This may also make it difficult to use Linux 2.x kernels, though experimental support seems to have begun with 2.6.31. It looks like kernels 3.7 and later have full support.

Edit: Another interesting thing with that slide is that it only lists DDR4 support for Skylake. I'd heard it might support both DDR3 and DDR4.

 

[vailr]

Edit: Another interesting thing with that slide is that it only lists DDR4 support for Skylake. I'd heard it might support both DDR3 and DDR4.

Yes: they also omitted the Haswell 22nm CPU's that can work on Intel 9-Series desktop boards.

 

[mfenn]

I'm inclined to agree. It could just mean they're removing the old EHCI controllers (native USB 2.0) from the PCH. This isn't a problem because the Intel xHCI controller is fully backwards compatible with USB 2.0.

It might make a few problems with 7 installation from USB devices, as 7 does not have a built-in xHCI controller driver...

This seems the most likely thing (going to xHCI only).

 

[VirtualLarry]

More bullshit from Intel. Much like their Bay Trail platform not supporting Windows 7 either. (See ECS Liva's lack of Win7 support).

 

[piasabird]

You really think all USB devices will cease working? Get real.

 

[mikeymikec]

You really think all USB devices will cease working? Get real.

It's a good question - how long will USB be around for?

Serial and parallel only gave way to serial because in most cases the latter was significantly better.

 

[master_shake_]

motherboard manufacturers are still going to use low cost usb 2.0 solutions to keep functionality.

this is a non issue.

and if it is an issue serva + slipstreamed usb 3 drivers ftw.

 

[Cerb]

It's a good question - how long will USB be around for?

Serial and parallel only gave way to serial because in most cases the latter was significantly better.

My last 3 motherboards had serial and parallel headers, and you can still buy boards at mainstream store like Newegg with them on the IO plate. Dell, HP, and Lenovo still sell PCs with them on the back (via header and ribbon cable), too.

USB 1.0 compatibility is going to be needed for a very long time to come. But, so long as plugging in a USB 2.0 device causes it to invoke compatible USB 2.0/1.1 controller logic, without fail, having all ports be USB 3.0 would be a positive move. Like with buggy PCI chips, I'm sure they've internally got the kinks worked out by now, for those problematic USB input device chips.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

USB 1.0 compatibility is going to be needed for a very long time to come. But, so long as plugging in a USB 2.0 device causes it to invoke compatible USB 2.0/1.1 controller logic, without fail, having all ports be USB 3.0 would be a positive move. Like with buggy PCI chips, I'm sure they've internally got the kinks worked out by now, for those problematic USB input device chips.

Besides, if you really need specific USB2.0/1.1 support you can always add a PCI/PCIe controller. At least for desktops.

 

[escrow4]

7 is obsolete - its out of mainstream support so don't be surprised if something like this happens. Next year is Win 10. That looks like a hilariously bad translation though.

 

[Cerb]

7 is obsolete - its out of mainstream support so don't be surprised if something like this happens. Next year is Win 10. That looks like a hilariously bad translation though.

It's still coming on new systems due to demand, though, and it will take a few years for 10 to filter in. No 7 support would mean a consumer-only design.

Reality check: I just unboxed a Windows 7 PC, which is going to replace a Windows XP PC.

 

[inachu]

This can be a good thing for security. Do you want a point of sale system to have USB so a customer can walk up to it and stick in a program to copy all transactions?

Just maybe depending on the job type they do not need USB anyway.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

This can be a good thing for security. Do you want a point of sale system to have USB so a customer can walk up to it and stick in a program to copy all transactions?

Just maybe depending on the job type they do not need USB anyway.

A point of sale terminal shouldn't have exposed ports in the first place. No matter which variety...

If it can't be avoided use physical USB locks like these:

http://www.lindy-international.com/...htm?websale8=ld0101.ld020102&pi=40454&ci=6006

 

[Cerb]

A point of sale terminal shouldn't have exposed ports in the first place. No matter which variety...

Yet, every major chain has exposed ports on theirs.

But, most still aren't using USB, but PS/2 or serial, at last of what I've seen in my area (I wonder: how many people walk in a store each day and actually pay attention to such things?).