@Enthousiast any difference between Microsoft ISOs and an ISO created by UUP dump when it comes to 22000.132 build?
anybody have issue with 160 build as guest VM in Hyper-V ? In my case, login prompt doesnt shows up if enhanced session are used. if i don't use enhanced session it shows up normally.
Every time I return home to Windows 10 after a few days escapade with the new 11 build I feel elated and relieved as if 10 was and should in fact be the next version of Windows and not vice versa. Anyone else has that same curious feeling of being upgraded after you reinstall 10?
In a word, no. Mostly (but not entirely), I prefer Windows 11. Settings for example is now much improved, and finding obscure things like the bluetooth troubleshooter is much easier than in Windows 10. Notifications are much less annoying in Win11 in my opinion. I couldn't care less about the changes to Explorer etc because I use Total Commander which is a massively superior file manager. Nor do I care about "drag 'n drop" as I never used that nonsense anyway - what's so hard about double clicking on a file to open it?
On the whole, yes I do prefer 10. There are things I have to work around in Win11 to be able to achieve stuff that just works on 10. Win11 is slightly more polished in places, but I haven't seen ANYTHING in it so far that makes me want it, let alone make up for the things that no longer work.
Currently playing with these. I've removed all but the Home/N/Pro/N to match the typical UUP download and the MS cut iso is a little under 500mb smaller. The strange thing is a pro index exported by itself with compression set to maximum (the default setting) is actually larger than the UUP version. I don't know how well it bodes for the double cumulative hypothesis of mine yet. We only have the one to play with and it's not that far off from the iso cumulative so it won't be indicative of a future result anyway, but I'm curious. I also need to learn how to do the psf updates. The uupdump website downloads a tool that processes them. I'll have to figure out the best way to handle these updates before I proceed.
Me too, the start menu in W10 is much better imo, settings are easier on W11 but of no frequent use. Boot is faster in W11, but with a SSD in W10 is fast enough too.
Here is an interesting story - the users agreements all specify that the company can't be sued in court, that the dispute must go to arbitration, which is notoriously biased in favor of the company. We sued Dell for violation of the warrantee. They immediately moved for dismissal and referral to arbitration. We replied that the agreement was in the box. THEY replied that it was also on the website. WE replied that it was buried so deep you couldn't find it and the retail, business, and educational agreements were run together so you couldn't tell which applied to you. The court denied their motion and Dell immediately settled big.
So, firstly I gotta say that @abbodi1406 's Win10ui script is amazing. You can get it here: https://forums.mydigitallife.net/threads/windows-10-hotfix-repository.57050/page-105#post-1216064 You can take the MS .132 iso or a UUP 22000.1 iso (any of the 22000.x versions with the update box ticked off), go into the hotfix thread and download the latest servicing stack and cumulative update. Get oscdimg.exe or cdimage.exe (same file just renamed) stick the updates and the cdimage.exe file in the same directory as the win10ui script and run the script as admin. Extract your iso to a working directory like c:\myiso and then in the script point it at your extracted iso. Apparently it even handles the psf files. I guess it downloads a psfextractor file or something. Maybe it's not too hard and it just extracts them to their own folder and integrates them that way. I've always known you could do that, I've just never done it. And for the experiment I've taken the MS .132 iso and exported just the Home/N/Pro/N indexes to a new install.wim Then I've run it with all of the updates from the uupdump .160 to see what would happen with the double cumulative hypothesis. This is not a final test. It is not divergent enough so not enough files will be replaced from the MS build to be definitive. Further down the line as builds approach something like .500 or later it could drastically change the results. To start with, as I've stated, initially Pro index lists as being smaller than the UUP variant, but when compressed with the default maximum compression it actually comes out larger. Sometimes this happens and it's a quirk with the way files are handled with the file access table and the way files are compressed. It doesn't exactly do a deep dive to analyze the best way to order files. Overall the MS cut iso was a little less than 500 mb less in size than the uup variant which is expected because the way updates are integrated is more uniform on MS version compared to the way it allows users to do it. The MS version has the same UID and I think time stamp with no pending status and thus will be compressed at the same rate and be considered the same file. The UUP version will not and thus take up more room. To give the double compress version the best chance at being the smallest it can be I've utilized the win10ui's cleanup image option with resetbase. While I don't expect it will actually do much as cumulative updates set the pending flag and take up the majority of the space, it might clean up a bit of useless junk around the edges. It is the most useful in the boot.wim and winre.wim which do not care if there is a pending status and will power through and remove superseded updates. Sadly, to my knowledge, MS has never given us the option to do this on install.wim images. Even with the secret registry key setting, it doesn't change anything. So for the results: Win11 MS.132 cut iso down to 4 indexes home/n/pro/n to mirror a uup typical download and then integrated with all of the updates minus the .132 servicing stack update which is already present Then compared with uup 22000.160 first draft iso. MS.132-to-.160 size: 4.75GB UUP.160 size: 5.36GB MS.132-to-.160 install.wim only: 4.11GB UUP.160 install.wim: 4.65GB Again, this is what I expected and it might remain true for a while, but it also might not remain true as the cumulative updates get very large in number and replace all of the files present in the .132 update that was present in the MS iso. At that point the uniformity of the MS updates in the iso no longer matters and those superceded components could just be extra bloat. While I am fairly familiar with the process, I am by no means a CBS or WinSXS expert.
For those who might be interested. If you find your Windows 11 to be slow and sluggish when downloading, tansferring files from one place to another or running any program in your system, note that it is largely caused by the Windows Defender. It is not always advisable to turn off your Defender but if you are working on trusted sites, transferring trusted files, etc you can turn it off to experience good performance.