If a package called Microsoft-Windows-20H2Enablement is present while installing the newest CU, Version 2009, Build 19042 is what you'll be greeted with in winver. If?
https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...c-20h1-vb_release.80763/page-128#post-1597100 CU still gets re-offered. Doesn't trigger installation stages on shutdown/restart tho. I'd say it's just cosmetic or w/e, no real issue imo.
I've checked via regedit that microsoft-20h2-enablement package is listed but it still shows windows 2004 19041.264 with winver. I know it's only a cosmethic thing but I'd like to understand, instead of leaving this in a sort of "mistery". Nobody has offered a way to show how he did it.
Code: Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion] "CurrentBuild"="19042" "CurrentBuildNumber"="19042" "DisplayVersion"="20H2" "ReleaseId"="2009" [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Version\Kernel] "KVB"=dword:00000001
Absolutely not. Redundant re-trim causes less actual work on a sane SSD than redundant re-defrag on an HDD (the analysis part will usually cause some head movement). You could issue 1000 re-trim every day and your SSD would still live 10+ years (before it dies from something else).
More likely release date would be Oct. / Nov. Looks like same deal as 1903 to 1909 10.0.18363_1909 enablement package (windows10.0-kb4517245)
Was it a clean installation? From stock ISO or modded? Modded= Modified ISO with Pre-integrated updates (CU SSU etc) Asking this as I've seen that same with modded ISO OS installation.
I'm not trying anything. I'm trying to tell that the next update of version 2009 will be the same as 1909. if someone has nothing to do, then let them draw the versions they want through the registry.
Then mention it is a picture taken from Albacore's tweet and you have no info on how he did it. This covers all the info needed that the proof of another registry only "upgrade" for 19041> 19042 exists: https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...c-20h1-vb_release.80763/page-128#post-1596992 Here i noted that it would be a modified install on which the picture was taken. https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...c-20h1-vb_release.80763/page-128#post-1597256 Here is the proof of my claim: https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...c-20h1-vb_release.80763/page-129#post-1597276 Here is published how to fake it: https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...c-20h1-vb_release.80763/page-129#post-1597365
You article link only was based on hearsay at that moment, @abbodi1406 his scripts and investigation to fix the 19042 iso filename back to 19041, which showed scientif factual info about it.
IKTR, abbodi posted that after I've shared those article link here, & I've seen his post earlier as well. and, those ain't 'my articles', I just shared the links of those articles here