Why use a language packs when there is SVF(/SFX), which creates the original iso in the desired language
I was unaware that someone found the direct links to SVF / SFX files for LTSB on Microsoft's servers. If not, why use those when you can use ISO's?
I prefer direct ISO's and so do most folks who come here. -- You have missed an opportunity to inform the public, as opposed to just troll (furthering the ISO agenda - thanks ).
These are patches to be used in combination with the source iso, the patch is 20-30x smaller to download then the ISO.
You are not wrong -- SFV files are smaller to download, but as you have noted, you lose time converting SFV files to ISO, so the time difference (gain) is lost.
Converting takes a minute (depending on the system hardware, but download speeds also depend on hardware and ISP (and some have download limits) plus when you want more iso's it will be faster to download), plus iso's will be deleted by the file hosts.
The hardware argument goes both ways and the torrent means you no longer depend on a host and will have faster download even on a slower or less stable connection. I guess the only time the SFV argument wins the day is if your connection is so slow (56k for example) that even a torrent cannot help you.
A good torrent depends on both seeds and an HTTP source (as mine does). Your SVF files you are dependent on the host (your original argument). I guess you could torrent you SVF files and with an HTTP source, then you win the download argument, but are still limited to the hardware conversion.
Please help me understand what are all those sfx lines? I hunted two of them one from torrents and one from a web host: 031... *en_windows_10_enterprise_2016_ltsb_x64_dvd_9059483.iso 21d... *en-gb_windows_10_enterprise_2016_ltsb_x64_dvd_9060114.iso each has some 3.3, 3.4 GB am I good to go installing. if so which one?