[DISCUSSION] Microsoft Validation OS

You rock @CaptainKirk1966 !
I try to test more in my free time, I hope to see a tutorial for many project out this summer

 

It's definitely awkward. I wish I could get windows shared folders working Can't start Lanmanserver or LanmanWorkstation services. Missing dependencies...

 

Interesting stuff.
Ain't vcruntime 100,120,140 present if you integrate the bundled cabs? Or is that just a useless subset as well?
I do take issue with your usage of "run pretty much out of the box". That's definitely not it. You had to "work" a bit for it like yourself described in the first paragraph

 

No , oddly enough, vcruntime was not integrated by adding the bundled cabs. And, it is a heck of a lot easier to install a server os version

 

Why oddly? VC++ 10 and later runtimes never added to Windows by default

 

I'm sorry but the vast quantity of irony and misunderstanding of what this is contained within this line is one of the funniest bits I've ever read on this site.
A validation OS intended to be quick and as bulletproof stable as possible purely to check hardware which might in itself have extremely limited capacity (eg embedded controllers, the Pi range, etc) having a GUI is wrong for so many deeply obvious reasons.

But then of course Apple would have one. Their customers are raised on a brain dead media consumption device. Not computers. I shouldn't expect their tech side to be any different really. Simple things for simple minds.

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

I think of it as being intended as a return to a thin client kind of setup. Perhaps a bunch of these hooked up to one "mainframe" sort of deal even. I mean, it is literally a small OS designed purely to test and auto validate hardware. Is the RAM okay? Is the wifi chip? Will the hardware work as intended? Set up a group of devices, connect, run the tests. I don't understand why people are surprised or puzzled to find it does so when it's literally called "Validation OS".

But... the fun to be had is like with Server Core, or the original version of Hyper-V OS (which had more capability than Hyper-V OS R2 because it was less stripped out) twisting it to do semi desktoppy tasks using as low a resource base as possible. To be honest, even if it could be made to run something like Links or a similar browser - hey, there's the novelty value.

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

"Links" does also exist.

 

Links - at least the x86 version - does indeed work just fine and fast. Will have to try the variants too.

 

I expect most things built with cygwin, mingw32, or mingw64 will work. I was inclined to experiment more, I might even try the emacs editor.

 

Are you sure you wanna go there? Validation OS is meant to validate WINDOWS 11 HARDWARE. Not your dumb examples of embedded controllers and Pi holes.

So, you need some minimal working frameworks out of the box. And basic GUI support. Not missing dependencies. How can you properly test functionality with this piss-poor VOS is DOS? That's my take.

And bark all you want at Apple, but their development chain is rock-solid. And yes, they use GUI interfaces even on the factory floor. Part because it's cheaper since you don't have to train your workers to compile c++ to make something work ad-hoc level - you can use anybody - even there where you can't have depressed slaves one dime a dozen with 2 phd's wasting themselves on a factory floor, but where you have to meet diversity quotas and other social constructs, or simply worker's rights. Part because it leaves less room for error. Part because it's more efficient. Part because it's more fun. Yeah. Turns out, those lazy westerners are actually more productive than massively larger teams in other zones (if you treat them right).

 

Because you're not testing "functionality" in a way that needs a GUI. You're testing literally the most basic facets of the hardware and that it works. Does all the hardware get detected and report back correctly? That is what this is for.

 

Come on, it's not really DOS, even if it has a similar command line interface. It may be awkward for general use, but it's 64-bit, networks, multitasks, and afaik doesn't have a 640k memory limit.

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

So you're angry because Microsoft made an OS you disliked for having more stuff than it should, then reason that it probably didn't sell because of this, then angry because they made another - again also FREE - OS that does a similar task but with less stuff as you wanted, but then NOT more "BLOAT" at the same time, because it doesn't fit what you want it to do, even though it is literally named for the task it is supposed to do, which I have pointed at several times.

Go dig out Embedded 7 and perhaps make your own personalised stripped down OS like I did at one time. This clearly isn't for you. That does not make it useless.

I'll have Validation OS run a check to see that you do. And it still won't need a GUI to display "PASS" or "FAIL".

 

Quite good fun to have links-g working nicely. I also did a very random check to see if using Server VNEXT's latest preview version with the boot.wim would work, and it does. Tempted to try it with some obscure "lite" flavours at some point just because. But first I guess OpenVPN or something...

 

You need to login to view this posts content.

 

OK now you have me curious, what does apple use? Also the scenerio you described is exactly what windows 11 is lol