Sailfish wrote:

> Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
> however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
> USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA port
> and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.
>
> The link below contains 2 images, the 1st image is a CPU-Z readout of my
> CPU. The 2nd contains the properties of both the SSD (top 2) & HS
> (bottom 2).
>
> Images: https://imgur.com/a/KHep6tf

It's possible with a late failure in the Restore, it
is doing (or attempting to do) something with boot materials.
Adding the MBR boot code. Making changes to the BCD
(on the Active partition). Or for that matter, setting the
boot flag on the Active partition so it is Active.

If it's practically done the entire restoration, then it had drivers.

I wonder if WinRE and WinPE do the same things, when
you make a CD with them. You would not expect Macrium to
latch onto this concept, without testing it.

Paul

Paul graced us with on 5/7/2021 1:52 PM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>
>> Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
>> however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
>> USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA port
>> and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.
>>
>> The link below contains 2 images, the 1st image is a CPU-Z readout of
>> my CPU. The 2nd contains the properties of both the SSD (top 2) & HS
>> (bottom 2).
>>
>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/KHep6tf
>
> It's possible with a late failure in the Restore, it
> is doing (or attempting to do) something with boot materials.
> Adding the MBR boot code. Making changes to the BCD
> (on the Active partition). Or for that matter, setting the
> boot flag on the Active partition so it is Active.
>
> If it's practically done the entire restoration, then it had drivers.
>
> I wonder if WinRE and WinPE do the same things, when
> you make a CD with them. You would not expect Macrium to
> latch onto this concept, without testing it.
>
That another puzzling part. The test case where it appeared to complete
the restore was when I used the boot menu installed WinRE; while the
test case where it fails before it even starts was when I was using the
SD card installed WinRE. I will re-attempt the test case where it seems
to restore the partition but failed at the end but this time enable the
Verification check at the beginning to see if it, too, fails the
verification. Also, I never created a DVD WinRE so I should give that a
test case run, as well.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/7/2021 5:04 PM:
> Paul graced us with on 5/7/2021 1:52 PM:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
>>> however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
>>> USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA
>>> port and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.
>>>
>>> The link below contains 2 images, the 1st image is a CPU-Z readout of
>>> my CPU. The 2nd contains the properties of both the SSD (top 2) & HS
>>> (bottom 2).
>>>
>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/KHep6tf
>>
>> It's possible with a late failure in the Restore, it
>> is doing (or attempting to do) something with boot materials.
>> Adding the MBR boot code. Making changes to the BCD
>> (on the Active partition). Or for that matter, setting the
>> boot flag on the Active partition so it is Active.
>>
>> If it's practically done the entire restoration, then it had drivers.
>>
>> I wonder if WinRE and WinPE do the same things, when
>> you make a CD with them. You would not expect Macrium to
>> latch onto this concept, without testing it.
>>
> That another puzzling part. The test case where it appeared to complete
> the restore was when I used the boot menu installed WinRE; while the
> test case where it fails before it even starts was when I was using the
> SD card installed WinRE. I will re-attempt the test case where it seems
> to restore the partition but failed at the end but this time enable the
> Verification check at the beginning to see if it, too, fails the
> verification. Also, I never created a DVD WinRE so I should give that a
> test case run, as well.
>
Some good news and some better news.

After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
(default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far, boot
recovery is working swimmingly.

The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM on
my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are noticeably
faster than before.

Ref:
https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions

Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on this
problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to make
..mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot level
restore program.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish wrote:

> Some good news and some better news.
>
> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
> Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
> two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
> configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
> that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
> (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
> since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
> Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
> WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far, boot
> recovery is working swimmingly.
>
> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM on
> my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are noticeably
> faster than before.
>
> Ref:
> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>
>
> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on this
> problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to make
> .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot level
> restore program.

I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.

There is a list of WinPE versions here.

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

3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.

5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
...
10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.

Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
bit more when tested in the same conditions.

There might be a few drivers which would need to be
manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
is probably already there.

So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.

But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
sources and less ways for it to go wrong.

Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.

WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".

Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
working stuff.

The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
machines don't boot from USB (that started around
year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.

Paul

On 2021-05-08 3:23 a.m., Paul wrote:
> Sailfish wrote:
>
>> Some good news and some better news.
>>
>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
>> Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
>> two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
>> configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
>> that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
>> (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
>> since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
>> Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
>> WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far,
>> boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>
>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>> noticeably faster than before.
>>
>> Ref:
>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>
>>
>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>> level restore program.
>
> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>
> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>
>   3.1   Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
>         WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>
>   5.0   Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
>         Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
>   ...
>   10.0.19041.1  Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>
> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>
> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
> is probably already there.
>
> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>
> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>
> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>
> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>
> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
> working stuff.
>
> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>
>
Thanks, Good work, Glad to see you and Paul got a handle on it. :-)

Rene

Paul graced us with on 5/8/2021 1:23 AM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>
>> Some good news and some better news.
>>
>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
>> Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
>> two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
>> configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
>> that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
>> (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
>> since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
>> Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
>> WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far,
>> boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>
>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>> noticeably faster than before.
>>
>> Ref:
>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>
>>
>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>> level restore program.
>
> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>
> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>
> 3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
> WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>
> 5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
> Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
> ...
> 10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>
> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>
> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
> is probably already there.
>
> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>
> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>
> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>
> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>
> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
> working stuff.
>
> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>
As I've come to expect, very interesting observations with link
reference for additional information, thanks.

Even though I don't have a need to need USB3 for restore capability now
that I have an internal 4TB drive for my backup image stores, I will
attempt to use WinPE 5.0 as a test case run. As Rene mentioned, it never
hurts to have backups for backups. As an aside, I've removed the boot
backup loader WinPE option and decided just to go with multiple the SD
card copies (although, I may still create a non-destructive DVD version
as well).

Given time, I may even try WinPE 10 to see how it performs on Win7 in
the very unlikely event that I find a use for Server 2012 systems in the
future. I realize that I will eventually be forced to migrate to Win10
but will resist mightily to the end.

OT:OT: Reasons for avoiding Win10

1. Win10 nixed Aero (skuemorphic realism icons + transparancy window
frames) desktop and opted for the soul-crushing flat-design desktop.
2. On the test runs I've made when making the decision to stick with
Win7, Win10's performance was worse than Win7. Note: I do have Win10 on
my laptop and on my desktop as a Win7 Virtual Box machine (needed to run
TurboTax).
3. The whole GUI has been made much less friendly and accessible for
power users.
4. Most importantly, the need to log on in order to use it is a huge
privacy invasion and is also the main reason I only have my smartphone
on when traveling and using Maps. Much to my kids dismay, they can't
conveniently reach me using text or my smartphone and must call me on my
VoIP home portable phone.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/8/2021 8:32 AM:
> On 2021-05-08 3:23 a.m., Paul wrote:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> Some good news and some better news.
>>>
>>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end
>>> since Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7
>>> systems and two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration
>>> environment I configured. Reading the online documentation more
>>> thoroughly I noticed that they had two PE versions that were
>>> recommended for Win7, WinRE (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE
>>> 3.1. I had selected WinRE since it was the default choice. However,
>>> while it may work with some Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work
>>> with mine. I finally selected WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and
>>> have run tests and, so far, boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>>
>>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>>> noticeably faster than before.
>>>
>>> Ref:
>>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>>> level restore program.
>>
>> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>>
>> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>>
>> 3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
>> WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>>
>> 5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
>> Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
>> ...
>> 10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>>
>> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
>> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
>> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
>> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
>> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
>> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
>> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>>
>> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
>> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
>> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
>> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
>> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
>> is probably already there.
>>
>> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
>> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
>> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>>
>> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
>> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
>> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
>> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
>> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
>> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
>> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>>
>> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
>> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>>
>> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
>> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
>> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
>> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
>> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
>> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
>> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>>
>> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
>> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
>> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
>> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
>> working stuff.
>>
>> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
>> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
>> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
>> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
>> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
>> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
>> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
>> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
>> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
>> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>>
> Thanks, Good work, Glad to see you and Paul got a handle on it. :-)
>
Your assistance was also instrumental in finding the resolution.

Cheers

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/8/2021 8:45 AM:
> Paul graced us with on 5/8/2021 1:23 AM:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> Some good news and some better news.
>>>
>>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end
>>> since Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7
>>> systems and two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration
>>> environment I configured. Reading the online documentation more
>>> thoroughly I noticed that they had two PE versions that were
>>> recommended for Win7, WinRE (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE
>>> 3.1. I had selected WinRE since it was the default choice. However,
>>> while it may work with some Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work
>>> with mine. I finally selected WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and
>>> have run tests and, so far, boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>>
>>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>>> noticeably faster than before.
>>>
>>> Ref:
>>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>>> level restore program.
>>
>> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>>
>> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>>
>> 3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
>> WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>>
>> 5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
>> Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
>> ...
>> 10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>>
>> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
>> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
>> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
>> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
>> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
>> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
>> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>>
>> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
>> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
>> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
>> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
>> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
>> is probably already there.
>>
>> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
>> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
>> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>>
>> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
>> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
>> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
>> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
>> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
>> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
>> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>>
>> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
>> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>>
>> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
>> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
>> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
>> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
>> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
>> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
>> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>>
>> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
>> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
>> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
>> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
>> working stuff.
>>
>> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
>> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
>> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
>> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
>> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
>> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
>> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
>> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
>> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
>> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>>
> As I've come to expect, very interesting observations with link
> reference for additional information, thanks.
>
> Even though I don't have a need to need USB3 for restore capability now
> that I have an internal 4TB drive for my backup image stores, I will
> attempt to use WinPE 5.0 as a test case run. As Rene mentioned, it never
> hurts to have backups for backups. As an aside, I've removed the boot
> backup loader WinPE option and decided just to go with multiple the SD
> card copies (although, I may still create a non-destructive DVD version
> as well).
>
> Given time, I may even try WinPE 10 to see how it performs on Win7 in
> the very unlikely event that I find a use for Server 2012 systems in the
> future. I realize that I will eventually be forced to migrate to Win10
> but will resist mightily to the end.
>
> OT:OT: Reasons for avoiding Win10
>
> 1. Win10 nixed Aero (skuemorphic realism icons + transparancy window
> frames) desktop and opted for the soul-crushing flat-design desktop.
> 2. On the test runs I've made when making the decision to stick with
> Win7, Win10's performance was worse than Win7. Note: I do have Win10 on
> my laptop and on my desktop as a Win7 Virtual Box machine (needed to run
> TurboTax).
> 3. The whole GUI has been made much less friendly and accessible for
> power users.
> 4. Most importantly, the need to log on in order to use it is a huge
> privacy invasion and is also the main reason I only have my smartphone
> on when traveling and using Maps. Much to my kids dismay, they can't
> conveniently reach me using text or my smartphone and must call me on my
> VoIP home portable phone.
>
I finished using the WinPE 10 WIM version. It both passed the the SSD+HD
partitions MRimage verification AND restored the SSD partition without a
problem. Since the documentation suggests the the Win 10 WIM is a
superset of the Win PE 5 WIM I will pass on testing it (unless there's
something I'm missing in not doing so.)

I still need to do a thorough stress test on both the WinPE 3.1 and the
WinPE 10 WIMs but that will need to wait for a bit. However, I since I
do have a 2TB USB portable HD, I plan to do a restore from it on each of
the above two WIMs plugged into a USB 3 port to quantify the performance
difference between the USB2-only and the USB2+3 WIM.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/8/2021 11:10 PM:
> Sailfish graced us with on 5/8/2021 8:45 AM:
[snip/]
>
> I still need to do a thorough stress test on both the WinPE 3.1 and the
> WinPE 10 WIMs but that will need to wait for a bit. However, I since I
> do have a 2TB USB portable HD, I plan to do a restore from it on each of
> the above two WIMs plugged into a USB 3 port to quantify the performance
> difference between the USB2-only and the USB2+3 WIM.
>
WIM WinPE 3.1 USB2-only
MRimg Drive: WD Portable Drive
Restoration Drive: 111.84/238GB SSD
Restore Time: 00:16:29

WIM WinPE 10 USB3
MRimg Drive: WD Portable Drive
Restoration Drive: 111.84/238GB SSD
Restore Time: 00:13:04

It indicates that the WIM WinPE 10 USB3 provides almost a 21% boost in
restoration speed on reading reading this USB drive.

Caveat: While both WinPE 3.1 and WinPE 10 WIMs so far seem to work fine
on my system (Dell 8900 XPS), it's not clear whether that may be the
case for other Win7 systems so some initial testing should be performed
beforehand,

YMMV

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg