I like this aggressive pushback very very much! I've been doing the same effort, but with marginal success. Coming from such a notorious project instead, I'm sure it's gonna make the appropriate waves and those tech-journalists-for-clicks will have a field day week blasting Microsoft and their puppets controlling the online narrative that all is well with Windows 11 and there's only take it, or leave it. It's not. And if we don't push back now, tomorrow we're gonna have online-only rented windows with pathetic usage quotas and zero ownership of our hardware, software and data. That's their wet dream. Well, no longer a dream, looking at the baffling argumentation against seconds on a clock from corporate talking heads like Raymond Chen.
I need some help please . I use rufus a lot ......... with an autounattend.xml file and it ignores it .......... but when i use the same file in an .iso it works ( as far as i can see ) . Can someone please tell me what i'm doing wrong ?
? I had to post it as a .txt file because i cant post an .xml ......... in rufus its just the .xml without the .txt on the end
Thank you very much I put the autounattend.xml file on the iso / USB after the autorun.inf and not in the install.wim . I had ' Theorys ' .......... I was wondering if i used the name 'Administrator' to many times and it didnt want to create the account being user , display name and group ......... and / or because the iso name is LTSC 2021.iso and the USB name is LTSC 2021 and not LTSC_2021 and was wondering if when it tryed to reboot during instalation it couldnt find it because of that . I'll read the links and then experiment
en_windows_11_consumer_editions_x64_dvd doesn't look like the name of a a 22H2 ISO. Are you sure you are actually using a 22H2 ISO and not a 21H2? The option is not needed for 21H2 (except for Home, but I'm still undecided about adding a specific workaround for Home in 21H2), so it won't be proposed if Rufus detects anything prior to 22H2. At any rate, if you want a proper answer, I will need to see your complete Rufus log, which you can access with Ctrl-L or the small "Log" button left of START.
Code: Consumer Editions Disk: Link: en-us_windows_11_consumer_editions_x64_dvd_bd3cf8df.iso File size: 5.12 GB SHA1: 849971ba1ddef294be2a79233edcf56b4e6991b0 Build Number: 22000.194
Well, that's not the log I asked, but your Build Number: 22000.194 is more than enough to tell you that, whereas you did quote "# Also allows to bypass the mandatory requirement for a Microsoft account on Windows 11 22H2", you are NOT using a 22H2 build at all, as 22000.194 is 21H2. Please understand that what the Microsoft account bypass does for 22H2 releases, is restore the behaviour of the 21H2 release (where, once you unplug the network, you will be able to create a local account). Therefore, you will obvioulsy not see the option if you are using a 21H2 ISO, like you are doing here.
@Akeo, now that the release is up, can I add the first request for the next version? Dual UEFI / BIOS mode enabled by default, and not behind an obscure cheat code (alt + e). You have rejected this request in the past based on something that did not really fly at that time either: that it's confusing for the users. Many years have passed since, UEFI is no longer a novelty, people got used to their usb sticks appearing two times in the boot menu, once for UEFI, once for BIOS. And you also sorted out SecureBoot support (lack of being the behind the scene reason I suppose). Never made sense for me that rufus won't match the media - all windows 10+ ISOs being dual uefi+bios bootable. It's a hassle. Specially when the official MediaCreationTool does so. After these latest windows-centric changes, maybe it's time?
may I ask another question? it will not be a problem when boot.wim have an answer file? and I put another one in a USB root drive?
But that's just the thing: it's not very helping in practice, imho. You've been forcing regular users to make UEFI-only sticks, and when that did not work, BIOS-only sticks. On a personal note, I have been aiding (for free) schools, orphanages and other institutions with various donated / dump-grade hardware, most pre-dating UEFI, but with some UEFI capable. Sometimes dual-booting compatibility must be taken into account. And Windows 10 had high demand, as it not only increased reliability and online security, but overall has been great in the education field (even microsoft store used to have an education-centric alternative). I'm with microsoft on this one - dual-anything is adding convenience, not taking it away. And in the off-chance of mistake, microsoft provides MBR2GPT (while multiple free 3rd-party solutions exist to convert without destroying existing data). So the screenshot above is nice and all, but it's leaning towards a vanity point imho, compared to instructing users to select UEFI entry when available. It's not even a GUI choice. But it's your project and it's totally ok to stick with your explicit design decision. Tho, you did eventually added SecureBoot support wich was also against explicit design decision, so I had to try
I am aware of the struggle to get SecureBoot working and I fully agree with the stance (that you ended up revising, begrudgingly as it was). I just find the dual boot support a weird hill to make a point - uefi is the default, not bios - would have been easier to slap the abusive and anti-competitive microsoft practices the other way around. They've used secureboot+gpt one-deal-package for years to screw *nix, but there's not even a fight anymore, many distributions are planning for this sad reality. At the same time, there's still need for both modes, even with 11 (with people making their own stand getting it on potatoes, or the wow factor). In the context of multiple monthly installs on mixed modest hardware done by students and teachers without a strong technical background, dual mode behind a cheat code had less appeal than using MCT ("press what?" "now must do the stick again?"). If anything, it's 5-6 years later, not "NOW!!", and I haven't personally bugged you mean time with it. I sincerely apologize for opening old wounds.
Then allow me to let you in on another part of the design decisions that go behind Rufus: Rufus is purposefully not designed to let everybody and their grandmothers install an OS. Instead, I expect people to have a minimum level of knowledge about boot, or have performed a modicum of research (and yes, that includes understanding terms like BIOS, Legacy and UEFI) if they want to use Rufus, because I do want people to have a fighting chance to troubleshoot their issues if boot or install doesn't go well. Trying to pretend that boot should be a no-brainer operation and that people shouldn't be required to do a minimum of research before they attempt to carry it out, whereas the whole thing has the potential to irreversibly destroy data or leave a system inoperable, is a sure way to leave people stranded, who won't be able to sort themselves out when that happens. As such, I have no problems placing what some may consider deliberate hurdles, especially with terminology (it's no accident that Rufus prominently mentions CSM) or amount of options, because, by all means, if you approach boot as it it shouldn't be a daunting task, you're probably in for a some unwelcome surprises. And, from where I stand, that's especially true if you're going to attempt to boot in BIOS/Legacy mode. I'm even more concerned about the fact that you're using academical environment, where by all means people should be more prepared to learn and do their research, as an attempt at a counter example... The preservation of ignorance is not something that should ever qualify as a right (and I could elaborate how this is where a lot of the global problems we are seeing today stem from). So, I'll happily let users who think that they shouldn't have to learn about boot or how to configure their system use the MCT, especially as I sure don't have the resources of Microsoft support to try to help those same users if something goes wrong... It may not look that way, but Rufus and MCT are designed for different types of users. And, whereas I do try to make things easier in Rufus for said users, please also bear in mind that, unlike what Microsoft's software design trend appears to imply, simplifying things does not actually equate dumbing them down.
That's absolutely fair. Spoiler: The rest.. I've literally mentioned orphanages, so I'm talking about educational environments where even showing up for school is a plus. Not MIT. Gotta first be able to walk, then we can talk about running performance. Computers are a strong factor in small towns and rural areas with many de-facto abandoned children (parents working overseas years long), minorities and etc. already pressed away from school. That one hour or so of "fun" means sticking for couple of those less fun hours as well, and information does stick on, giving those kids a small fighting chance having a modicum of digital competencies (unlike their parents chopping pork and working fields over seas that can't even operate a soda machine or pass an airport unassisted). And usually there's a teacher doing the "management" after-hours, no IT departments and hefty budgets. Can manage doing a few clicks in some installers, or even exchanging a hdd or ram stick. Could probably learn to use rufus better, but there are other pressing issues and being a rare but necessary occurrence, somehow keep forgetting and I end up in a conversation talking about how rufus just wasted an hour and the stick must be done again, because it's not booting on potato x. I have donated probably more than one hundred pre-made usb sticks so far. And while I've made a no-brainer mct script for such diverse outdated machines from donations, that's not always feasible if there's no internet. How is a request for dual-boot default to match mct unreasonable (being a config for already existing functionality) and the very real life example more concerning, still beats me. But I have dropped it and won't mention it ever again. Apologies again.