About Windows 10

[My1]

Yeah it was winload (s and w are adjacent)

How can I start sfc or dism if this thing wont even start (and f8 boot wont work as well. I check the efi data later when I have access to my pc again (de facto night here, need to sleep a bit) but could you maybe attach it so I can cross-load it from via my other win installs?

By the way sinload.efi isnt that stupid I mean win10 IS a sin

Edited July 21, 2015 by My1

[NoelC]

Unfortunately, it's not strictly legal to pass Microsoft system files around.

 

However, you should be able to recover your system by booting up from a DVD made from the Windows ISO.

 

I'm concerned that somehow you've gotten malware - maybe in the ISO you downloaded?  Anyway, we can talk more about it tomorrow, no problem.  Maybe someone else who has seen that particular problem can chime in and offer a possible solution.

 

-Noel

[My1]

well I havent booted the win10 in half an eternity so probably not really

 

also why should it not be legal to pass files of an open medium (aka w10 preview) around?

Edited July 21, 2015 by My1

[bphlpt]

also why should it not be legal to pass files of an open medium (aka w10 preview) around?

 

We have to abide by the rules set by the various software manufacturers, in this case MS, or we could be penalized.  It doesn't matter that the particular files are "free", the end user must  obtain the files directly from an authorized distribution source or the file is considered to be "warez".  Even if the file has the same MD5 or whatever, both the file and the source of the file has to be legit.  MSFN is not an authorized distribution source.  Those are the rules we have to live by.

 

Cheers and Regards

[Tripredacus]

It's not an official ISO file. I got it from here:

Windows OS ISOs are not redistributable. Link to that site has been removed from your post.

[Aloha]

OK, I edited my post too.

 

Btw, how come they made such a default theme that no one wants to use at all?

[NoelC]

Look up "Break It Thinking".

 

Look up the failure of Digital Equipment Corporation, where they were unable to survive their own success.

 

Imagine how difficult the work would be to actually improve on Windows 7.

 

Imagine a company less interested in increasing market share by making a product that you want than in finding a way into your wallet using a product you already have and won't abandon lightly.

 

Microsoft clearly wants to reset the clock to 1.0 so they can have another decade of improving Windows.  To do that they need to get substantially everyone on a system that's barely acceptable, with obvious need for improvement, then get everyone to pay for a service (Windows as a Service) through which they continually "improve" the system by slowly adding back the goodness. 

 

To put it bluntly, improving on near perfection is a LOT harder than improving on something with obvious problems.

 

They want us to forget how good it was / could be and applaud every incremental improvement of the Metro/Modern paradigm.  Imagine when they make multitasking possible, for example, or restore visual styles.

 

As such, you can be sure they absolutely do NOT want people like Big Muscle restoring the goodness and usability to their system prematurely, separately from Microsoft's money-making model.  It's entirely possible that if he succeeds he will be accosted by Microsoft's lawyers, if he hasn't been already.

 

-Noel

[JorgeA]

They can (try to) get away with this only because they dominate the PC market so greatly. Imagine if Ford or Toyota were to introduce cars that did 12 MPG, had to be hand-cranked to start, and lacked power steering and air conditioning, intending to add these back year by year so that people felt the product was getting better. How fast can you say "bankruptcy court"? 

 

We could use a strong competitor in the OS market to keep Microsoft on their toes. If I were an Internet billionaire I would think seriously about backing a project to create a Windows-compatible operating system, carefully designed to avoid stepping on legal mines. (Think ReactOS, but with real drive.) I might not even care that I could lose a few hundred million: it would be fun to see how fast the 'Softies shaped up and started making a decent Windows again.

 

--JorgeA

[jaclaz]

They can (try to) get away with this only because they dominate the PC market so greatly. Imagine if Ford or Toyota were to introduce cars that did 12 MPG, had to be hand-cranked to start, and lacked power steering and air conditioning, intending to add these back year by year so that people felt the product was getting better. How fast can you say "bankruptcy court"? 

 

Not Ford, nor Toyota, however JFYI, these nice guys in Argentina do hand build hand crank started and no air conditioning (simply forget about power steering ) cars that in their simplicity they manage to sell for several hundred thousands US$ apiece (and I am told they have a looooong waiting queue):

http://www.pursangweb.com/

http://www.carbuildindex.com/21748/pur-sang-bugatti-type-35-replica/

surely it is a niche market, but never tag an idea as absurd as it seems.

 

Now, let's say that someone designs a new, fastish very simple two seater car for commuting use (actually making 84 MPG or 2.8 L/100km ) and delivers it to you for less than US$ 7,000, would it sound crazy?

Maybe it is, however this is what is in the works:

http://www.eliomotors.com/

http://gas2.org/2015/06/12/elio-motors-starts-work-on-5th-gen-prototype/

 

Now if (tomorrow) Ford would revamp a (slightly modernized) version of the Soybean Car:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean_car

http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2013/10/17/cars-of-futures-past-fords-soybean-car/

would you really think at it as a bad idea?

 

Maybe the real issue is that there is not someone with the capabilities, vision and drive Henry Ford had:

Ford’s reasons for pursuing a soybean-based car were noble enough as well. Such a vehicle would have blended agriculture with industry, supporting both farming and manufacturing; the resiliency of its plastic panels (and the strength of its steel frame tubing) could have yielded a safer automobile; and a shortage of metal could have meant an interrupted supply of automobiles (or an increase in pricing) even without the onset of World War II. In an alternate reality, perhaps the Soybean Car could have been a success, lowering the price of the automobile to the point where not owning one was seen as folly.

 

 

jaclaz

Edited July 22, 2015 by jaclaz

[JorgeA]

 

Not Ford, nor Toyota, however JFYI, these nice guys in Argentina do hand build hand crank started and no air conditioning (simply forget about power steering ) cars that in their simplicity they manage to sell for several hundred thousands US$ apiece (and I am told they have a looooong waiting queue):

http://www.pursangweb.com/

http://www.carbuildindex.com/21748/pur-sang-bugatti-type-35-replica/

surely it is a niche market, but never tag an idea as absurd as it seems.

 

That was interesting. But as their own website indicates, these are racing cars intended to become collector items. If a major automaker were to phase out its existing product line and try to push this on its customers, I suspect that the vast majority of the customers would go to somebody else to get the type of car they prefer. It's the attempt to railroad the customer base into this that makes the idea absurd.

 

--JorgeA

Edited July 22, 2015 by JorgeA

[jaclaz]

If a major automaker were to phase out its existing product line and try to push this on its customers, I suspect that the vast majority of the customers would go to somebody else to get the type of car they prefer. It's the attempt to railroad the customer base into this that makes the idea absurd.

 

I think we'll never be able to ascertain that (because as you pointed out no major car manufacturer would ever put at risk the status quo by attempting to disrupt the market with some real innovation).

 

If you prefer it is not unlike the "smartphone" business, every car looks very similar to another one in the same "market segment" or whatever it is called, has exactly the same base functionalities and as soon as one of the manufacturer includes some added gizmo (often utterly useless in practice) all the other add something similar to their cars.

 

jaclaz

[NoelC]

One of the things that big companies occasionally seem to have, that's above the heads of most executives, is the ability to execute to a multi-year plan.

 

Imagining the fashion that surrounds the car business...  The change in appearance of automobiles is clearly driven by a multi-year plan.  Maybe there's an "auto designer's convention" where they all get together and decide how best to fleece the public for a few years, I don't know.

 

I think Microsoft not doing the best they possibly could with Windows 10 - in many ways - indicates there's a big picture multi-year plan they're working to.  You'd think such a plan should only include improvements, however they're done, but it's not hard to imagine part of the plan involving "resetting everything that's come before so we can start down a new path".

 

-Noel

[Aloha]

Hi guys,

I remember when I fresh installed build 10162, I chose to have it on drive X; drive C is where I have W8.1. W10 automatically made itself C: and changed the drive with W8.1 into something else afterwards. 

I wonder if anyone here finds this annoying and tries to change the drive letter names back to their original names?

Thanks for any replies to advice and share opinions.

[JorgeA]

I have Win10 on a laptop, dual-booting with Windows 7 on separate partitions of the same HDD. When I boot into Win10, the Win7 partition becomes drive D:, but the same partition is labeled C: when I boot into Win7.

 

My understanding of it (which could be wrong) has been that Windows, in order to work properly, requires the drive of the active OS to be labeled C:. So I just live with the shifting drive labels as I boot into one or the other version of Windows.

 

--JorgeA

 

[Aloha]

JorgeA,

But I also remember when I had earlier build, perhaps 10041, when I booted into W10 it was still drive X just like I named it. And W8.1 remained as drive C. W10 worked fine at that moment but because I don't like it much, I don't boot into it often. 

Thanks for replying.