Yes, now I understand. I'm not a native English speaker, so the En-US image isn't for me. Question: Is it possible to modify your script's code so it doesn't care what language the ISO image is fed to it for processing? Personally, this is the first time I've encountered a script that uses language discrimination. Seriously, what difference does it make to the script what language the image is used in? For example, in the scripts I write and use, the image is processed in absolutely no localization. I was simply very interested in testing your proposed image processing method.
As always. Excellent work. We can never thank you enough for the time you spent for us. We are grateful to you for preparing this script. Thank you.
Technically, yes can. Let me cook new Script detect the ISO language automatically and only protect the language already inside the source ISO. However, this only support official untouched ISOs in different languages. It would not guarantee support for already-modified, debloated, or unofficial Lite ISOs. Cheers
Very good, the script should be universal in its linguistic understanding. Only then will its general application make sense. Thank you very much – we look forward to it...
Here's an example: this isn't your wonderful PowerShell, of course, but the same old, trusty DISM. But here I can process any install.wim image, any localization, and any Windows release from 24H2 to 26H2: There is no link, they say that it is also not allowed?! Note: To try out the tool, unzip the downloaded archive to any partition. User instructions are in the Help folder.
I don't quite understand why this is also prohibited here? I think a very interesting solution was proposed. Well, if no one is interested in this solution either, then I'll delete my link to the archive...
Hello, First of all, thank you very much for your great work on this script; it has been extremely helpful. While working with the AppxPackages removal section, I noticed a small opportunity to optimize the code by combining the loops and removing duplicate blocks and the :SKIP labels. By using a single dynamic package list, the execution becomes cleaner and avoids potential label conflicts. I tested this modification locally, and it runs very smoothly and stably. I just wanted to share this tweak in case you'd like to consider it for future updates. Thanks again for your continuous effort and sharing this amazing tool! Code: ECHO ============================================================ ECHO Remove Provisioned AppxPackages from Registry ECHO ============================================================ set key="HKLM\TK_SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Appx\AppxAllUserStore\InboxApplications" set "packages=BingWeather GetHelp Getstarted MicrosoftOfficeHub MicrosoftSolitaireCollection QuickAssist WindowsFeedbackHub" if "%RemoveEdgeBrowserInterface%"=="1" set "packages=%packages% MicrosoftEdge.Stable" for %%i in (%packages%) do ( ECHO Removing: %%i for /f %%a in ('reg query "%key%" /f %%i /k ^| find /i "Applications"') do if not errorlevel 1 (reg delete %%a /f) )
It is not prohibited from our side. It was just a humorous remark, as the author of WimWizard himself (who is probably still among us, listening sus) demanded that we never speak about it again, here. Which is ridiculous, as you cannot suppress discussion about public tools, even if you are the author. Make it private, and discussions stop on their own.
I see—so I misunderstood you (the vagaries of online translation). He, the author of the wimwizard script, has no reason to be offended. After all, I never claimed to have developed it myself, and in my script I noted this in the comments, crediting all the authors whose ideas I partially used in my tool. By the way, the “wimwizard” code in my tool accounts for no more than 10% of the total code and is used only when removing components from an image is impossible by any other means. Let me put it this way: there are as many opinions as there are people, and every author of a given script has their own personal vision of how it should work. I’ve tried so many of these scripts, and not a single one meets my personal requirements for such a tool. That’s because some authors get bogged down in unnecessary checks on the image being used, while others include a bunch of unnecessary actions in their code. That’s why, for my own use, I’ve created an image-processing tool that fully meets my personal requirements—and I’m not forcing anyone else to use it. Everyone chooses for themselves which path to take from here. IMHO p.s. I don't think the author wimwizard is so brilliant that he wrote the wimwiward.exe file from scratch. Most likely, he grabbed it from somewhere, made a few changes to it, and renamed it. I'll do the same thing and give it a name that won't annoy the script's author by mentioning his “wimwizard” in my tool.
@sainfo He left because he broke one of the rules and started asking for donations (which is a no-no, donations are given voluntarily). When that was corrected by the team, he threw a tantrum and demanded the topic to be removed (his good right). He can also request that we don't host downloads of his tool, which we don't. But he can not suppress discussions about the tool, So, please, discuss freely (maybe not in this topic, however).