Yes, in the ESD dedicated thread: https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/windows-10-esd-repository.59082/#post-992532 Considering 21H1 still is Beta channel, what do you expect? Here are the TB ISOs: https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...2-21h1-vb_release.80763/page-333#post-1650658
Linked in Original Post as well. Would be nice if more people would check that one more often, somebody keeps adding info there all the times. 19043.867 ESD/ISO is the should-have-been "RTM", that failed small scale deployment in unspectacular microsoft fashion - it's tradition by now, "RTM" is a banned word. It's not clear yet if microsoft will still promote .867 from beta status, or retry with a later build (.906 is the current beta, still mediocre)
The term Release to Manufacturing (RTM) may have been replaced with Service Refresh (Svc Refresh). There's all sorts of weird terms like Insider-Preview and pre-release, etc.
[QUOTE="...not much difference from mvs ones that are also made automatically from uup, but with ms in-house tools[/QUOTE] So why would MSFT need to use UUPDump files to build MVS ISOs? I've always thought that the MVS ISOs were the best because they are paid for.
So why would MSFT need to use UUPDump files to build MVS ISOs? I've always thought that the MVS ISOs were the best because they are paid for.[/QUOTE] Where do you think UUP Dump Files come From ? Downloaded from Microsoft Servers.
Use of MSFT servers is something I already knew about UUP. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the source files for MSV ISOs needed to come from the UUP servers. So there's 1 file in a UUP folder, and we conclude that all the MVS ISO files are derived from UUP? 'Not sure I completely buy into that.
How about someone show me the script that MSFT uses to pull files from UUP and assemble them with those socalled in-house tools? I dunno! I had to edit and manually enter it. Seems that the opening quote may have been missing from Sams quote. It this a real problem for you?
Is MDL broken? Half the time it logs me off in about a minute. But I don't control that. Not a big problem for me.
They probably don't actually pull the files from UUP, the files come from themselves, the fact is, the UUP folder exists on all original MSFT ISO/ESDs from the time they started the UUP platform, that's all i showed with a wink.. Someone asked for 21H1 ESDs and was expecting non IP (not much IP about 19043.xxx, only the 21H1 EP is IP) stuff.
obviously microsoft uses couple extra uwp files that are not made public, as well as private dism exported functions, don't think they keep another set of formats beside native, esd and uwp (and.. container). over time I've seen too many mistakes shared on both mvs iso's (that one would expect to be higher quality), and uup-dump generated images as base image goes are quite similar, while mvs boot.wim appears altered after creation via some in-house tool that does not clean up deletions uup-dump builds are great for multi-editions and architectures iso's if you have the time and processing/storage resources to create them, while way less download size (same as mct builds). the mvs = higher quality seems more like a mit
This was already with win 7 ISOs (never checked on Vista), boot.wim and winre.wim contain leftovers in the [DELETED] folder. UUP = never meant for ISO creation (and lacks some fod's compared to MVS ISOs (afaik)) MVS = centrally distributed ESD = formerly used by WU and MCT, now MCT only
Technically, uup dump = a collection of smaller esd's with specific components that the converter script uses to sort-of recreate the mct-like esd with multiple images, and from then on it's dism / wimlib Once upon a time I did a full file compare for images inside mvs vs. uup iso's same build, and the diff was insignificant. Btw I got a full esd via windows update fairly recently on old version such as 1703, it upgraded to 1809, then to 1909. Earlier last year it was 1703-1803-1903. Always hated the intermediary version, guess hardware was flagged for possible failure to complete 190x (but was always ok when done manually).
Noobie question: do I need to sign in Windows Insider Program (Settings app) before upgrading with an Insider Preview ISO? In my desktop I signed in and then performed an in-place upgrade using a build 19043.867 ISO. Signing in Windows Insider just makes preview builds available for download through Windows Update, instead of having to download the ISOs and install them?
I've examined your posts and your observations are interesting. The shared mistakes between MVS and UUP ISOs combined with identical file comparisons have lead you to believe that there is very little difference between the MVS and UUP ISOs. That would would lead me to think that converted ESDs and Techbench ISOs might be better?