List of software that doesn't support Windows 7

[yoltboy01]

Today I got Microsoft Office v2105 working on Windows 7 (System 64 Bit, Office 32 Bit).

I knew that versions above v2008 were harder to port for Windows 7, so I tried out bunch of stuff and found Word working. The rest of the suite however crashes immediately during Start-Up

Proof: https://imgur.com/a/SC5lVEJ

[yoltboy01]

Well, after testing v2105 today, I succesfully managed to install Office 2021 LTSC (v2108) on Windows 7 as well! It is not very stable - most apps crash but Word opens and I'm experimenting on making it run fluently on Windows 7.

 

Proof: imgur.com/a/word-2021-on-windows-7-4abLWzT

[OOmpaLOOmpa]

Today Ubisoft Connect finally stopped working on windows 7. There used to be some workaround but today even with said workaround it would simply refuse to connect you to ubisoft server, citing outdated version.

[D.Draker]

15 hours ago, OOmpaLOOmpa said:

Today Ubisoft Connect finally stopped working on windows 7. There used to be some workaround but today even with said workaround it would simply refuse to connect you to ubisoft server, citing outdated version.

I can assume it works off a Chrome engine, so you gotta fine its UA (user agent) and replace with a Win10 one.

[yoltboy01]

Mozilla just extended it‘s support for Firefox 115 on Windows 7/8.1 till September 2025

Source: deskmodder.de/blog/2025/02/19/firefox-115-esr-verlaengert-die-unterstuetzung-fuer-windows-7-bis-september-2025/

 

Personally, I think they could have just supported 7/8.1 till v128 and support it all the way up to 09/25. It would have been a better choice than keeping an older version updated for 2 years

[Karla Sleutel]

On 2/19/2025 at 1:49 AM, yoltboy01 said:

Personally, I think they could have just supported 7/8.1 till v128 and support it all the way up to 09/25. It would have been a better choice than keeping an older version updated for 2 years

Why? So you would continue to use it for free, without the need to buy a new OS?

[yoltboy01]

11 hours ago, Karla Sleutel said:

Why? So you would continue to use it for free, without the need to buy a new OS?

Because it is literally nonsense to have two (maybe even three in a few months) ESR branches running at the same time.

What was the reason for not supporting Windows 7 and 8.1 till Firefox 128 and then migrate them to the ESR chanel, when 115 ESR and 128 ESR will probably have the same EOL date? Users of older operating systems could have profited from the features introduced between 115-128 as well. Let's say Firefox 115 ESR will be extended for another 6 months -> you are patching an older version instead of a newer one with better Web Standards. Makes no sense for me.

I give you another example: Microsoft not releasing IE10/11 for Windows Server 2008 SP2 was such a dumb idea, since IE9 does not feature the same HTML5/CSS standards as IE11. While these two browser version were released 2 years apart from each other, Microsoft could have ported it back for 2008 SP2 as well but they didn't. Up to this day, they continue to support IE9 on 2008 SP2 (with Premium Assurance) but it makes no sense, since you cannot browse the web with that version anymore. Most sites do not render correctly etc. IE11 would have been a huge advantage for the remaining users in literally any way possible

To conclude, it is always better to have a more up-to-date version because of newer in-build web technologies. If I would have to choose, I would always pick the newer branch for my older OS

Edited February 21 by yoltboy01

[i486girl]

On 2/21/2025 at 8:18 AM, yoltboy01 said:

To conclude, it is always better to have a more up-to-date version because of newer in-build web technologies. If I would have to choose, I would always pick the newer branch for my older OS

Honestly, with how much Firefox has suffered from encrappification thanks to Mozilla and that sweet Google money, I'd be more than happy to use an older ESR branch, or a fork that gets rid of those issues entirely. Truth be told I'm using Pale Moon as my main browser. I'm pretty sure there's still many people who would be more than happy to still be able to use Firefox ESR 52 if it was still possible today, they're just not aware of projects like Pale Moon and Basilisk.
 

While yes, newer web technologies do improve the browser's performance by a long shot, they really don't fix the issue of the browser's user experience worsening over time.

Edited March 3 by Tripredacus
language