REF:
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-is-testing-ads-in-the-windows-11-file-explorer/

[excerpt quote=\"
As you can imagine, the reaction to this was adverse, to say the least,
with some saying that File Explorer is "one of the worst places to show
ads," while others added that this is the way to go if Microsoft wants
"people ditching Explorer for something else."
\" /]

Having to get nagged for wanting to view my filelist? Seriously!? It's
features like this that make Win7 holdouts like myself to dig in even
deeper resisting upgrading.

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

On 3/16/2022 11:28 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> REF: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-is-testing-ads-in-the-windows-11-file-explorer/
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> As you can imagine, the reaction to this was adverse, to say the least, with some saying that File Explorer is "one of the worst places to show ads," while others added that this is the way to go if Microsoft wants "people ditching Explorer for something else."
> \" /]
>
> Having to get nagged for wanting to view my filelist? Seriously!? It's features like this that make Win7 holdouts like myself to dig in even deeper resisting upgrading.
>

This is where ClipChamp came from.

Microsoft bought it.

https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/9/22969250/clipchamp-windows-11-microsoft-video-editing-app

Honestly, the OS is becoming a garbage heap, when you start looking at
some of the files in it, and are trying to figure out where they
came from. I found an SSL file in System32, with no Microsoft build number
on it, and it looks like some FOSS thing needed by some other FOSS thing
they threw in.

I don't mind fun and games, if all the decorations properly identify
the ownership and pedigree. Please do not dump random crap in there,
because we'll have no way to figure out whether we made a mess
or they made a mess. I need to know if something I installed,
has been fucking around. I can't do that if the OS is "filled with noise".
That's no way to run a mental asylum. Program Files is a good place
for random crapola. System32 should reflect Microsoft materials with
a strong Microsoft theme (i.e. "essential items needed to make base OS work").
Enough with this "lets add folders to System32" thing.

I get the strangest vibe, that there are no longer *managers*
at Microsoft. Just a bunch of frat parties.

Paul

On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 08:28:22 -0700, Sailfish
<NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:

>REF:
>https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-is-testing-ads-in-the-windows-11-file-explorer/
>
>[excerpt quote=\"
>As you can imagine, the reaction to this was adverse, to say the least,
>with some saying that File Explorer is "one of the worst places to show
>ads," while others added that this is the way to go if Microsoft wants
>"people ditching Explorer for something else."

If Microsoft wants to put ads in File Explorer, it's OK with me, since
I never use File Explorer anyway. There are several better
alternatives. The one I like best and use is Directory Opus.

>Having to get nagged for wanting to view my filelist? Seriously!? It's
>features like this that make Win7 holdouts like myself to dig in even
>deeper resisting upgrading.

Your choice, of course. My choice for many Windows components and
other Microsoft products is to use a better alternative

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

Ken Blake wrote:

> If Microsoft wants to put ads in File Explorer, it's OK with me, since
> I never use File Explorer anyway. There are several better
> alternatives. The one I like best and use is Directory Opus.

Directory Opus Lite: $49 AUD (~$35 USD) for a single host license.
Directory Opus Pro Single: $89 AUD (~$xx USD) for a single host plus one
personal laptop.

I have several PCs and laptops. This can get expensive very fast.
Anything *free* that is an excellent, highly robust, and polished
replacement for MS File Explorer? I see lists of features for many
alternatives, but they always miss file control functions to focus on
file management. Does Directory Opus, or the alternatives, have the
file sharing functions? Or file security regarding ownership and access
permissions on files? Network functions, like looking at files on
network shared hosts? Or integration with Dropbox, OneDrive, and other
cloud-sync storage services? The alternatives might cover 90% of the
most common features, but it's the missing 10% that experts will miss.
Okay, I'm greedy. I'd want an alternative that was File Explorer's
replacement, and MORE, and free, too.

Another reason to stay on Windows 10, or earlier, or start migration
planning to ditch Windows altogether and move to a Linux platform.
Unlikely Microsoft would update Windows/File Explorer to insert the code
for an ad platform into old and unsupported versions (Windows 7).
Support ends on 14-Oct-2025 for Windows 10, so possible Microsoft would
insert the ad platform code into File Explorer in Windows 10.

The ads in File Explorer for Windows 11 is for the insider channel of
that OS. I'm not interested in spending time to do all the alpha/beta
testing for Microsoft, so I won't be getting (and have never gotten) any
Insider edition of Windows. In fact, as I've done with several versions
of Windows, I'll skip Windows 11, too.

Windows 11: skipped
Windows 10: usable
Windows 8: skipped
Windows 7: usable
Windows Vista: skipped
Windows XP: usable

The every-other-version toggle has become consistent: skip every other
version of Windows. Wonder when Microsoft will release Windows 12 after
using Windows 11 as betaware to determine where and how badly they
screwed up there. I usually don't adopt a newer Windows version until 3
years after its release. Again, I'm not interesting in being an unpaid
beta tester.

"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote

| In fact, as I've done with several versions
| of Windows, I'll skip Windows 11, too.
| | Windows 11: skipped
| Windows 10: usable
| Windows 8: skipped
| Windows 7: usable
| Windows Vista: skipped
| Windows XP: usable

That might be wishful thinking. Vista was a mess
because it was the first extra-bloated system and it
was a rush job, after they gave up on a .Net version
of Windows at the last minute. Then there was also
the Intel 915 chip fiasco, which saw them making a
version without Aero so that their plas at Intel could
dump a store of outdated chips onto the market.

7 is basically the same thing, with some adjustments,
and with faster hardware to handle the bloat. 8 was
their attempt to force sandboxed apps on the Desktop.
10 is a monstrosity, but at least it doesn't force Metro.

And a lot of people didn't like XP replacing 2000. The
"good" versions are arguably just the versions where
you've got used to new crap and they've made new
crap work better.

There's a general direction here. They see Apple
vacuuming wallets by scamming all sides in the app
market. They see Google getting away with sleaze.
(Last week there was news about Google putting
"Order Now" buttons on restaurant ads and then charging
for a cut of orders!) So Microsoft are trying to figure
out how to get some of that money.

This is actually over
20 years old. Their first attempt was Active Desktop.
Remember the Channel Bar? That was ads on the Desktop,
for the likes of Disney and Citibank. No one complained.
Average people didn't even noticed. They were too busy
trying to get their email without a bluescreen. We just talked
about the need to clean out "shovelware" when setting
up Windows.

The difference now, and increasingly, is that the system is
being kiosked. It's not your computer. It's an interface for
Microsoft services and you have no business using it except
to access their services. They've been saying that for years
now. "Windows as a service".

I find it interesting that MS have
always been a mix of brilliant and incompetent. They come
up with these ideas way ahead of everyone else. But they
have no idea of how to make products people want. They
just decide to vacuum wallets and then, almost as an
afterthought, try to come up with a gimmick to sell the
idea. Active Desktop is a great example. It was a half-baked
mess that could have been cooked up in a week. The premise?
Invite people to put ads on their own computer screens while
embedding IE into Explorer windows so that the courts couldn't
force them to remove it.

Active Desktop was Microsoft's attempt to own the web and
middleman it on Windows computers. In an interview years later,
Ballmer was still screaming that they would "win the Web". They
simply don't know how to live like decent human beings. It's
all a bitter, win-lose battle

| Again, I'm not interesting in being an unpaid beta tester.

Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.

Mayayana wrote:

> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>
>> Again, I'm not interesting in being an unpaid beta tester.
>
> Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.

Wrong again. I didn't adopt Windows 7 until 3 years after its release.
It didn't adopt Windows 10 until 3 years after its release. I adopt a
newer OS after trialing, not by switching to it as my primary platform.

Also, what I said about good-bad versions of Windows wasn't about my
personal opinion, or giving excuses regarding their quality. They were
about adoption rates and resistance by the IT community, not by boob end
users that take whatever they're given because, gee, it's new. However,
I don't remain on an old OS unless there is a substantial reason, like
having critical software that won't run on a newer OS version.

"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:17wxzbhf7prt2$.dlg@v.nguard.lh...
> Mayayana wrote:
>
>> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>>
>>> Again, I'm not interesting in being an unpaid beta tester.
>>
>> Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.
>
> Wrong again. I didn't adopt Windows 7 until 3 years after its release.
> It didn't adopt Windows 10 until 3 years after its release. I adopt a
> newer OS after trialing, not by switching to it as my primary platform.
>
> Also, what I said about good-bad versions of Windows wasn't about my
> personal opinion, or giving excuses regarding their quality. They were
> about adoption rates and resistance by the IT community, not by boob end
> users that take whatever they're given because, gee, it's new. However,
> I don't remain on an old OS unless there is a substantial reason, like
> having critical software that won't run on a newer OS version.

Is there a way of preventing Win 10 from ever updating to Win 11, while
still allowing 21H2 -> 22H1 -> 22H2 updates of Win 10 - unless or until MS
try to foist Win 11 on Win 10 users as a 22H2-style update.

My Win 10 laptop has said that it is capable of upgrading to Win 11 and I
want to make damn sure this doesn't happen, now that any specific update can
only be deferred and not stopped permanently.

"NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote

| Is there a way of preventing Win 10 from ever updating to Win 11, while
| still allowing 21H2 -> 22H1 -> 22H2 updates of Win 10 - unless or until MS
| try to foist Win 11 on Win 10 users as a 22H2-style update.
| | My Win 10 laptop has said that it is capable of upgrading to Win 11 and I
| want to make damn sure this doesn't happen, now that any specific update
can
| only be deferred and not stopped permanently.
|

I've been using ShutUp10, etc to change settings, as well
as disabling Windows Update and BITS services. (There's also
a new service, the name of which I forget offhand.) I'm
also using a firewall.

My experience is limited, but as near as I can tell, doing those
things works, except in a case where Office 365 was installed.
After that it turned on updates by itself and I had to
disable the 3rd service. I'm curious whether other people have
found the same. Or maybe most people actually want updates?
I'm happy to forego security updates in favor of never
contacting MS.

"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote

| > Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.
| | Wrong again. I didn't adopt Windows 7 until 3 years after its release.
| It didn't adopt Windows 10 until 3 years after its release. I adopt a
| newer OS after trialing, not by switching to it as my primary platform.
|

That means you've still been using Win10 for 4 years.
I only bought it because I want to avoid Win11 and there's
nothing else to buy. I still have little use for it. As you
said, it makes people into unpaid beta testers.

I am surprised, though, that you waited 3 years. I guess
I'm just used to seeing you in most of the groups that
I'm in. :) I was surprised that so many people took up
Win10 early. And most complained. And most said they were
only testing it. But it's no longer testing when people use it
for several years.

On 3/17/2022 5:59 PM, NY wrote:
> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote in message news:17wxzbhf7prt2$.dlg@v.nguard.lh...
>> Mayayana wrote:
>>
>>> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>>>
>>>> Again, I'm not interesting in being an unpaid beta tester.
>>>
>>> Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.
>>
>> Wrong again.  I didn't adopt Windows 7 until 3 years after its release.
>> It didn't adopt Windows 10 until 3 years after its release.  I adopt a
>> newer OS after trialing, not by switching to it as my primary platform.
>>
>> Also, what I said about good-bad versions of Windows wasn't about my
>> personal opinion, or giving excuses regarding their quality.  They were
>> about adoption rates and resistance by the IT community, not by boob end
>> users that take whatever they're given because, gee, it's new.  However,
>> I don't remain on an old OS unless there is a substantial reason, like
>> having critical software that won't run on a newer OS version.
>
> Is there a way of preventing Win 10 from ever updating to Win 11, while still allowing 21H2 -> 22H1 -> 22H2 updates of Win 10 - unless or until MS try to foist Win 11 on Win 10 users as a 22H2-style update.
>
> My Win 10 laptop has said that it is capable of upgrading to Win 11 and I want to make damn sure this doesn't happen, now that any specific update can only be deferred and not stopped permanently.

Yes, there is. Jan.26,2022. Windows 10 group.

http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cssrpma%243au%241%40dont-email.me%3E

Specify_target_Feature_Update_version_to_21H2.reg <=== six line text file, as shown below
<=== keeps OS on Windows 10 21H2 as update path

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate]
"ProductVersion"="Windows 10"
"TargetReleaseVersion"=dword:00000001
"TargetReleaseVersionInfo"="21H2"

Paul

NY wrote:

> Is there a way of preventing Win 10 from ever updating to Win 11,
> while still allowing 21H2 -> 22H1 -> 22H2 updates of Win 10 - unless
> or until MS try to foist Win 11 on Win 10 users as a 22H2-style
> update.
>
> My Win 10 laptop has said that it is capable of upgrading to Win 11
> and I want to make damn sure this doesn't happen, now that any
> specific update can only be deferred and not stopped permanently.

If you don't have the TPM chip, you can't get the Windows 10 upgrade. I
went into the BIOS to disable the Intel Platform Trust Technology (Intel
PTT) support. My mobo doesn't have a TPM chip, but emulates it in
firmware. Without the [emulated] TPM, the Windows 11 upgrade won't
install ... for now.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000007452/intel-nuc.html

Too many laptops to guess which brand and model you have. The specs
should tell you if TPM 2.0 is supported (TPM 1.0 is insufficient).

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/enable-tpm-2-0-on-your-pc-1fd5a332-360d-4f46-a1e7-ae6b0c90645c
"This article is intended for users who are not able to upgrade to
Windows 11 because their PC is not currently enabled with TPM 2.0 or
their PC is capable of running TPM 2.0 but is not set up to do so."
and
"TPM 2.0 is required to run Windows 11"

Some mobos don't come with an onboard TPM chip, but have a slot where
one on a PCB can be inserted. There's even a registry hack (see
https://www.techadvisor.com/how-to/windows/windows-11-tpm-2-0-requirement-3806413/)
to get Windows 11 to install on a non-TPM/non-IntelPTT setup. However,
you're going the other way, and trying to prevent a Windows 11 install.
The only time I've seen users declare they were forced to upgrade to a
newer version of Windows was for those who don't know how to read. They
got prompted there was a new version and offered a new version, but they
were not forced. They chose.

According to:

https://www.anoopcnair.com/windows-11-minimum-system-requirements-list/

the CPU and TPM 2.0 requirement might've been relaxed. You could use
the tool to see if it reports if your hardware meets minimum
requirements to run Windows 11. I installed and ran the PC Health Check
tool, and had it check my hardware for Windows 11 compatibility. It
immediately reported:

This PC doesn't current meet Windows 11 system requirements.
TPM 2.0 must be supported and enabled on this PC.

I don't have a TPM chip on the mobo, nor in a slot, and remember that I
disabled Intel PTT in the BIOS (to kill the TPM 2.0 emulation). So, the
tool is saying Windows 11 won't run on my computer. All the other
requirements have a green checkmark (OK) in this tool. It's just the
TPM 2.0 support that it flags as required but sees as missing. Despite
what the article claims, not having TPM 2.0 (hardware or firmware
emulation in BIOS) has the PC Health Check tool report that my computer
is not usable with Windows 11.

Whether or not your laptop has TPM 2.0 hardware, or firmware emulation
of TPM 2.0, and whether or not it has a BIOS/UEFI option to disable TPM
2.0 depends on the brand and model of your laptop which you failed to
mention. Read its manual, or boot and go into the BIOS config screens
to hunt around for TPM or Intel PTT options.

Mayayana wrote:

> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>
>|> Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.
>|
>| Wrong again. I didn't adopt Windows 7 until 3 years after its release.
>| It didn't adopt Windows 10 until 3 years after its release. I adopt a
>| newer OS after trialing, not by switching to it as my primary platform.
>|
>
> That means you've still been using Win10 for 4 years.
> I only bought it because I want to avoid Win11 and there's
> nothing else to buy. I still have little use for it. As you
> said, it makes people into unpaid beta testers.
>
> I am surprised, though, that you waited 3 years. I guess
> I'm just used to seeing you in most of the groups that
> I'm in. :) I was surprised that so many people took up
> Win10 early. And most complained. And most said they were
> only testing it. But it's no longer testing when people use it
> for several years.

I adopted it as a primary OS on my desktop at home after 3 years of
trialing it on test hosts, but the testing was over 2 years after its
release. Even after adopting Win10, I made sure to have an image backup
of Win7, so I had an escape route, and I tested the backup by using it
to restore back to Win7 which worked, so I used another backup to
restore the Win10 image. Yeah, there was a lot of shitty stuff in
Win10, but I managed to find the settings and tweaks to wrangle it to my
likes, but without going nuts by using ClassicShell (now OpenShell). If
I'm going to move to a new OS, I want to use the GUI for that version.
I will learn the new GUI, so I'm familiar when helping others.
Retrograding Windows 10 to a Win7 GUI means I wouldn't learn the new
GUI. I've been QA for decades, and switching between GUIs for different
operating systems is hardly a strain to me.

While I do QA at work, I'm not wasting my time on it at home. Windows
10 was released 6 years ago. I decided, after testing, to put it on my
primary desktop at home. I didn't start testing until around 2 years
after its release. Released 6 years ago, started testing 2 years later,
and adopted 3 years after release. My math says I've been using Windows
10 for 3 years, not 4 years. However, not using an OS doesn't stop me
from researching it, and even help other users with it, so it's possible
I participated in the Win10 newsgroup while testing it, and before I
started using it.

From my Sent folder, I was posting to the windows-10 newsgroup starting
back in late 2014. Windows 10 was released in 2015. So, a year before
its release I was discussing Windows 10. I don't have to own something
to research and learn about something to discuss it. I also don't have
to own a Bugatti Chiron to discuss it, too. You don't educate
beforehand? I knew Windows 10 was going to show up at work, so I
started learning early (and without enlisting in the Insider club). I
also learn programming languages before having to use them if I know I
will have to use them soon.

On 3/17/2022 3:49 PM, Mayayana wrote:
> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote
>
> | Is there a way of preventing Win 10 from ever updating to Win 11, while
> | still allowing 21H2 -> 22H1 -> 22H2 updates of Win 10 - unless or until MS
> | try to foist Win 11 on Win 10 users as a 22H2-style update.
> |
> | My Win 10 laptop has said that it is capable of upgrading to Win 11 and I
> | want to make damn sure this doesn't happen, now that any specific update
> can
> | only be deferred and not stopped permanently.
> |
>
> I've been using ShutUp10, etc to change settings, as well
> as disabling Windows Update and BITS services. (There's also
> a new service, the name of which I forget offhand.) I'm
> also using a firewall.
>
> My experience is limited, but as near as I can tell, doing those
> things works, except in a case where Office 365 was installed.
> After that it turned on updates by itself and I had to
> disable the 3rd service. I'm curious whether other people have
> found the same. Or maybe most people actually want updates?
> I'm happy to forego security updates in favor of never
> contacting MS.
>
>
>
Thanks for the tip, I installed ShutUp10 and it looks good.

On 3/17/2022 6:14 PM, Paul wrote:
> On 3/17/2022 5:59 PM, NY wrote:
>> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote in message
>> news:17wxzbhf7prt2$.dlg@v.nguard.lh...
>>> Mayayana wrote:
>>>
>>>> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Again, I'm not interesting in being an unpaid beta tester.
>>>>
>>>> Yet here you are, among the first to try these new versions.
>>>
>>> Wrong again.  I didn't adopt Windows 7 until 3 years after its release.
>>> It didn't adopt Windows 10 until 3 years after its release.  I adopt a
>>> newer OS after trialing, not by switching to it as my primary platform.
>>>
>>> Also, what I said about good-bad versions of Windows wasn't about my
>>> personal opinion, or giving excuses regarding their quality.  They were
>>> about adoption rates and resistance by the IT community, not by boob end
>>> users that take whatever they're given because, gee, it's new.  However,
>>> I don't remain on an old OS unless there is a substantial reason, like
>>> having critical software that won't run on a newer OS version.
>>
>> Is there a way of preventing Win 10 from ever updating to Win 11,
>> while still allowing 21H2 -> 22H1 -> 22H2 updates of Win 10 - unless
>> or until MS try to foist Win 11 on Win 10 users as a 22H2-style update.
>>
>> My Win 10 laptop has said that it is capable of upgrading to Win 11
>> and I want to make damn sure this doesn't happen, now that any
>> specific update can only be deferred and not stopped permanently.
>
> Yes, there is.  Jan.26,2022.  Windows 10 group.
>
>
> http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cssrpma%243au%241%40dont-email.me%3E
>
>
> Specify_target_Feature_Update_version_to_21H2.reg   <=== six line text
> file, as shown below
>                                                     <=== keeps OS on
> Windows 10 21H2 as update path
>
> Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
>
> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate]
> "ProductVersion"="Windows 10"
> "TargetReleaseVersion"=dword:00000001
> "TargetReleaseVersionInfo"="21H2"
>
>    Paul
>
Thanks Paul.

"Mike S" <mscir@yahoo.com> wrote

| Thanks for the tip, I installed ShutUp10 and it looks good.

I also got ClassicShell. (Some say the newer Open Shell is
newer. Classic Shell works fine for me. I haven't tried OS.)
And I got WinAero Tweaker as well as W10Privacy.

I'm not sure how thorough they are. Win10 is repugnant to
me. I don't want to spend months figuring it out. So I just
get those programs and go through adjusting all the settings
for no BS.

Every time I use Win10 I'm amazed by what people have
become accustomed to. The constant restrictions on every
little thing. The other day I used BootIt on my new laptop
to make a disk image, writing it to a data partition I'd set up.
When I rebooted, it wasn't there. Win10 somehow blocked
or deleted it! So I decided to replace that partition with FAT32.
But Windows won't let me make a Win32 partition bigger than
20 GB. So I had to boot back into BootIt to enlarge the FAT32
partition. Finally, I was able to make a disk image. I feel like
I should send Nadella some kind of Thank You note: "Thanks
so much for letting me use my computer today. I hope you
have a great day yourself."

It all makes me want to delete kernel32.dll in XP, just because
I can. :)

"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote

| You don't educate
| beforehand? I knew Windows 10 was going to show up at work

That makes sense if you need it for work. For myself,
I keep up on developments for my own curiosity, because
I write software and do web design, and because sometimes
I help friends. But I could see that 10 was going to be an
unusually ugly debacle. Once I knew it would come with the
VB6 runtime I knew all I needed to know to test my own
software. I don't use new stuff in new OSs. I like to write
to the core Win32 API, so that my software will run on all
Windows systems. Also, I've got to a point in life where I
have a new theme: "I'm too old for that shit."

That's my feeling with Win10, and was from the start.
With Win7 I spent a month figuring out how to optimize it.
With Win98/XP I wrote tweak software myself. With Win10
I don't consider it to be a usable product anymore. I'll use
it as needed, but with MS locking it down, I don't see any
mileage in learning tweaks... I'm too old for that shit. :)

On 3/18/2022 8:25 AM, Mayayana wrote:
> "Mike S" <mscir@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> | Thanks for the tip, I installed ShutUp10 and it looks good.
>
> I also got ClassicShell. (Some say the newer Open Shell is
> newer. Classic Shell works fine for me. I haven't tried OS.)
> And I got WinAero Tweaker as well as W10Privacy.
>
> I'm not sure how thorough they are. Win10 is repugnant to
> me. I don't want to spend months figuring it out. So I just
> get those programs and go through adjusting all the settings
> for no BS.
>
> Every time I use Win10 I'm amazed by what people have
> become accustomed to. The constant restrictions on every
> little thing. The other day I used BootIt on my new laptop
> to make a disk image, writing it to a data partition I'd set up.
> When I rebooted, it wasn't there. Win10 somehow blocked
> or deleted it! So I decided to replace that partition with FAT32.
> But Windows won't let me make a Win32 partition bigger than
> 20 GB. So I had to boot back into BootIt to enlarge the FAT32
> partition. Finally, I was able to make a disk image. I feel like
> I should send Nadella some kind of Thank You note: "Thanks
> so much for letting me use my computer today. I hope you
> have a great day yourself."
>
> It all makes me want to delete kernel32.dll in XP, just because
> I can. :)

That requires the Ridgecrop fat32formatter program.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200424145132/http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/index.htm?fat32format.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20200410224838if_/http://www.ridgecrop.demon.co.uk/download/fat32format.zip

Make an NTFS partition to start with, make sure it has
a drive letter, then fat32formatter can make it FAT32 for you,
up to 2TB in size.

Admin Command Prompt:

fat32formatter.exe D:

*******

I've never had a problem making backups, where the destination .img
being created, "disappeared".

VSS can be used to "freeze" a partition.

Say for example, we have these:

frozen_C:

C:

If a person writes to C: , it goes to the bottom item and C: is
updated in the normal way.

If we are backing up "frozen_C", it cannot "see" any new additions
to C: after the "frozen" point in time. This is to ensure backup
consistency.

When frozen_C: is released later, C: is unaware of its existence.

Now, if a person tried to *write* to frozen_C: , I don't know what
happens. Google says that "frozen_C:" is read-only, so then, we
cannot blame VSS for making your output .img file go away. But then
there would also be a dialog with a write error showing.

If the disk partition was not flushed at shutdown, the .img could
be treated as a file fragment, and readback of the USN journal
at the next startup, could remove all evidence of the file. But then,
the file might not be visible on the output partition just before
shutdown if that was the case.

One other thing -- Windows 10 and several other of the versions,
have a System Write Cache. If you turn off the power at the back of
the computer, before the System Write Cache is drained to disk, that
makes the file disappear too. The normal shutdown sequence, waits
until the cache is drained and does a flush() before telling the
BIOS to shut off the power via an ACPI object.

If I were you, I would want to understand how this happened, so
no other files you happen to be saving, get zorched. This might
not be just a BootIt issue. My curiosity would be triggered by
this, because this represents a "failure of backup integrity".

I've made backups online and offline, and not seen a problem.
The problems are mainly caused, when a program like Macrium
tries to compare the "real" (at-rest) file system metadata
to the "perceived" (fake) metadata Windows shows. Macrium fails
with various error codes, if Microsoft has been screwing around
again. But since no backup is even attempted (all checks are done
before creating anything), there is hardly any notion of having
made a backup because it dies so quickly.

Paul

"Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote in message
news:t11ubl$gcu$1@dont-email.me...
> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>
> | You don't educate
> | beforehand? I knew Windows 10 was going to show up at work
>
> That makes sense if you need it for work. For myself,
> I keep up on developments for my own curiosity, because
> I write software and do web design, and because sometimes
> I help friends. But I could see that 10 was going to be an
> unusually ugly debacle. Once I knew it would come with the
> VB6 runtime I knew all I needed to know to test my own
> software. I don't use new stuff in new OSs. I like to write
> to the core Win32 API, so that my software will run on all
> Windows systems. Also, I've got to a point in life where I
> have a new theme: "I'm too old for that shit."
>
> That's my feeling with Win10, and was from the start.
> With Win7 I spent a month figuring out how to optimize it.
> With Win98/XP I wrote tweak software myself. With Win10
> I don't consider it to be a usable product anymore. I'll use
> it as needed, but with MS locking it down, I don't see any
> mileage in learning tweaks... I'm too old for that shit. :)

I've used every version of Windows from Windows 3 onwards (95, 98, ME, 2000,
XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10). There have been some useful improvements along the way
such as a better file manager post-98. There have also been some worsenings.
For example, the file-search capabilities of XP were far better than
anything since - faster, more thorough (*) and controllable as to whether
you search filenames only or filenames and contents). But all the change was
evolutionary.

(*) If Win XP search couldn't find a file it really wasn't there; it wasn't
just in a location that Find didn't look.

Then MS foisted Win 8 on us. What a disaster! Not in the under-the-bonnet
changes, but from a UI point of view. We lost the start menu and had to wade
through the "mess of tiles" menu where all the icons are monochrome (white
on one primary colour or another) and move around between one viewing of the
menu and another. It took major effort to find the real shortcut to an
installed application so I could copy it as a desktop icon and/or a quick
launch bar icon (trying even to enable the quick launch bar was
"interesting"). Also they got rid of the minimise/maximise/close buttons in
the top right of all Windows apps.

So they brought out Win 8.1 which put back some of the design of the start
menu and min/max/close button of Windows prior to 8. And that's what you get
in 10 as well. Better start menu, but still not as good.

I mostly use a Win 7 desktop PC, and I want to continue for as long as
possible, because I really can't face the hassle of untangling and upgrade
to Win 10, which may involve reinstalling programs for which I non longer
have CDs or licence keys readily to hand.

When I bought a new laptop last year, I knew it would be Win 10, and I was
resigned to a lot of hassle, but I've found that as long as you make a few
essential tweaks, it behaves enough like Win 7's UI not to be a shock to the
system. My essential changes are:

- install Classic Shell (absolutely essential)

- enable quick-launch bar and add commonly-used programs to it

- turn on file extensions and hidden files in File Explorer

- turn OFF the idiotic merging of icons on the taskbar: a) so you get a
separate icon for every running instance of the same program, and b) delete
all icons on the toolbar which denote apps that are *capable* of being run:
to me, an icon on the taskbar denotes one thing only - a program which is
actually running, and should not be used alternatively to denote shortcuts
to programs that you might want to launch but which are not yet running

- change the Windows (File) Explorer icon so it calls "%windir%\explorer.exe
/e,c:\": the extra parameters make sure the list of drives is expanded, that
the focus defaults to the C drive with its root drive open, and possibly
something else

As long as Win 10 behaves reasonably similar to Win 7, I'm happy. The UI is
the important thing. To use a car analogy, I don't doubt that there will
have been various improvements to the "engine", but what's the use of a car
with a more powerful, more efficient engine if you have to get used to the
order of the pedals being different, the seats facing sideways, the gauges
on the ceiling etc.

I can now switch between my Win 7 desktop and my Win 10 laptop without
having to go through a stage of cognitive dissonance (a Dilbert phrase)
every time I move from one to the other. Muscle memory and "it should be in
the same place so I can do it by feel rather than by looking every time" are
important.

Oh, and I wouldn't touch the built-in Mail app of Win 10 with a bargepole.
In the absence of Windows Live Mail of Win 7, I use Thunderbird which is not
as good: I find that a lot of news postings that are visible in WLM don't
show up in TB ever or else only after a long delay. It's a shame that MS
welded their mail clients into the versions of Windows: for XP you *had* to
have Outlook Express, for Vista you had to have Windows Mail, for Win 7 you
had to have WLM. Ideally the mail clients should have been totally
separately installable so you could have OE or WM or WLM on any version of
Windows, rather than being forced to change every time you change version of
Windows.

Outlook (the Office application rather than the email domain - which bozo
decided to confuse those two things) is painful. Very powerful,
all-singing-all-dancing, but it lacks the ability to save the specification
(servers, ports, protocols, passwords) of an email account to an IAF file so
you can easily export/import when replicating an email account to a new PC,
and it is a pain to diagnose email connection faults and to configure. Maybe
it's just what I'm used to: the similar menus of OE, WM and WLM compared
with the totally different ones of Outlook. But the biggest problem with
Outlook is the inefficiency of saving *all* your email messages in *all*
your folders into one humungous PST file. That means you spend ages backing
up a multi-MB (or even multi-GB) file even though only a few messages have
been added since the last backup. WLM's use of a separate file per message
means only a few files need to be added/change incrementally from one backup
to the next.

On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 13:30:16 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>I've used every version of Windows from Windows 3 onwards (95, 98, ME, 2000,
>XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10).

You left out a few others since 3.0: 3.1, 3.11, WFWG 3.11, 3.2
(Chinese), Windows 98 Second Edition, 8.1, 11, Windows NT 3.1, Windows
NT 3.5, Windows NT 3.51, and Windows 4.0.

I started with Windows 2.0, and have run every version since then
(including 11) except for 3.2 and the NT versions. With an occasional
exception, I thought every version was at least as good as its
predecessor, and usually better.

> There have been some useful improvements along the way

Yes. Many.

>such as a better file manager post-98. There have also been some worsenings.

Yes. Many. Fortunately, most of those can be turned off, either
through Windows settings or third-party software.

>For example, the file-search capabilities of XP were far better than
>anything since - faster, more thorough (*) and controllable as to whether
>you search filenames only or filenames and contents). But all the change was
>evolutionary.
>
>(*) If Win XP search couldn't find a file it really wasn't there; it wasn't
>just in a location that Find didn't look.
>
>
>Then MS foisted Win 8 on us. What a disaster! Not in the under-the-bonnet
>changes, but from a UI point of view.

Yes. But it was easy to go back to what was much like the old GUI
using Start 8 or something similar.

> We lost the start menu and had to wade

No. Didn't *have to*. See above.

>through the "mess of tiles" menu where all the icons are monochrome (white
>on one primary colour or another) and move around between one viewing of the
>menu and another. It took major effort to find the real shortcut to an
>installed application so I could copy it as a desktop icon and/or a quick
>launch bar icon (trying even to enable the quick launch bar was
>"interesting"). Also they got rid of the minimise/maximise/close buttons in
>the top right of all Windows apps.
>
>So they brought out Win 8.1 which put back some of the design of the start
>menu and min/max/close button of Windows prior to 8. And that's what you get
>in 10 as well. Better start menu, but still not as good.

Yes and yes. But easy to get the old one back.

>I mostly use a Win 7 desktop PC, and I want to continue for as long as
>possible, because I really can't face the hassle of untangling and upgrade
>to Win 10, which may involve reinstalling programs for which I non longer
>have CDs or licence keys readily to hand.

I use a Windows 11 desktop PC, and I'm very happy with it.

>When I bought a new laptop last year, I knew it would be Win 10, and I was
>resigned to a lot of hassle, but I've found that as long as you make a few
>essential tweaks, it behaves enough like Win 7's UI not to be a shock to the
>system.

Yes.

> My essential changes are:
>
>- install Classic Shell (absolutely essential)

No, it's not absolutely essential. I don't like the new GUI, but some
people do. And for those of us who don't like it (including me),
Classic Shell is only one of several choice. As far as I'm concerned,
it's a good choice, but Start 10 is even better.

>- enable quick-launch bar and add commonly-used programs to it

I never did. I preferred the new task bar which was sort of a
combination task bar/quick launch bar.

>- turn on file extensions and hidden files in File Explorer

Yes. I completely agree with you there. I think Microsoft's defaults
there are terrible, but they go back farther than Windows 10. But it's
easy to fix.

>- turn OFF the idiotic merging of icons on the taskbar: a) so you get a
>separate icon for every running instance of the same program,

Idiotic? I don't think it's idiotic, but like you, I don't like it and
have it turned off. Some people do like it however.

>and b) delete
>all icons on the toolbar which denote apps that are *capable* of being run:
>to me, an icon on the taskbar denotes one thing only - a program which is
>actually running, and should not be used alternatively to denote shortcuts
>to programs that you might want to launch but which are not yet running

I disagree. You are referring to what I called "sort of a combination
task bar/quick launch bar." I like that feature.

>- change the Windows (File) Explorer icon so it calls "%windir%\explorer.exe
>/e,c:\": the extra parameters make sure the list of drives is expanded, that
>the focus defaults to the C drive with its root drive open, and possibly
>something else
>
>
>As long as Win 10 behaves reasonably similar to Win 7, I'm happy. The UI is
>the important thing.

To you, yes. To me, yes. But not to everyone.

> To use a car analogy, I don't doubt that there will
>have been various improvements to the "engine", but what's the use of a car
>with a more powerful, more efficient engine if you have to get used to the
>order of the pedals being different, the seats facing sideways, the gauges
>on the ceiling etc.
>
>I can now switch between my Win 7 desktop and my Win 10 laptop without
>having to go through a stage of cognitive dissonance (a Dilbert phrase)
>every time I move from one to the other. Muscle memory and "it should be in
>the same place so I can do it by feel rather than by looking every time" are
>important.
>
>Oh, and I wouldn't touch the built-in Mail app of Win 10 with a bargepole.

Same for me.

>In the absence of Windows Live Mail of Win 7,

You can still use it in 10.

> I use Thunderbird which is not
>as good:

Not as good to you. Better to me.

>I find that a lot of news postings that are visible in WLM don't
>show up in TB ever or else only after a long delay. It's a shame that MS
>welded their mail clients into the versions of Windows: for XP you *had* to
>have Outlook Express,

No. There were always other choices.

> for Vista you had to have Windows Mail,

No. There were always other choices.

>for Win 7 you >had to have WLM.

No. There were always other choices.

>Ideally the mail clients should have been totally
>separately installable

I agree.

>so you could have OE or WM or WLM on any version of
>Windows, rather than being forced to change every time you change version of
>Windows.
>
>Outlook (the Office application rather than the email domain - which bozo
>decided to confuse those two things)

When it comes to nomenclature, Microsoft is *terrible*.

>is painful. Very powerful,
>all-singing-all-dancing, but it lacks the ability to save the specification
>(servers, ports, protocols, passwords) of an email account to an IAF file so
>you can easily export/import when replicating an email account to a new PC,
>and it is a pain to diagnose email connection faults and to configure. Maybe
>it's just what I'm used to: the similar menus of OE, WM and WLM compared
>with the totally different ones of Outlook. But the biggest problem with
>Outlook is the inefficiency of saving *all* your email messages in *all*
>your folders into one humungous PST file. That means you spend ages backing
>up a multi-MB (or even multi-GB) file even though only a few messages have
>been added since the last backup. WLM's use of a separate file per message
>means only a few files need to be added/change incrementally from one backup
>to the next.

We agree on some things, but not on all. That's life. No two of us are
identical.

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

Are there not 3rd party file explorers that are even better than the
intrinsic ?

Something like "Everything" but like an explorer.
"Everything" maintains the list so no green ribbon of frustration.

Please post links of better Explorers.
Thank you.

Were is M$ brain ? Tilted into a different reality ?

Ken Blake graced us with on 3/16/2022 9:46 AM:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 08:28:22 -0700, Sailfish
> <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote:
>
>> REF:
>> https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-is-testing-ads-in-the-windows-11-file-explorer/
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> As you can imagine, the reaction to this was adverse, to say the least,
>> with some saying that File Explorer is "one of the worst places to show
>> ads," while others added that this is the way to go if Microsoft wants
>> "people ditching Explorer for something else."
>
>> Having to get nagged for wanting to view my filelist? Seriously!? It's
>> features like this that make Win7 holdouts like myself to dig in even
>> deeper resisting upgrading.
>
> Your choice, of course. My choice for many Windows components and
> other Microsoft products is to use a better alternative
>
Windows Explorer has it's uses sice it is integral to the OS; however, I
mostly use it as a launch pad for more productive prgrams such as Agent
Ransack (one of the best File Search programs I've found.

Still, as Paul mentioned, Microsoft attempting to monetize even
base-level pieces of the OS seems more like a company in financial
trouble than a multinational company secure in its ability to produce
newer features to offer its base.

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

Mayayana graced us with on 3/17/2022 5:22 AM:
> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>
> | In fact, as I've done with several versions
> | of Windows, I'll skip Windows 11, too.
> |
> | Windows 11: skipped
> | Windows 10: usable
> | Windows 8: skipped
> | Windows 7: usable
> | Windows Vista: skipped
> | Windows XP: usable
>
<snip />

> I find it interesting that MS have
> always been a mix of brilliant and incompetent. They come
> up with these ideas way ahead of everyone else. But they
> have no idea of how to make products people want. They
> just decide to vacuum wallets and then, almost as an
> afterthought, try to come up with a gimmick to sell the
> idea. Active Desktop is a great example. It was a half-baked
> mess that could have been cooked up in a week. The premise?
> Invite people to put ads on their own computer screens while
> embedding IE into Explorer windows so that the courts couldn't
> force them to remove it.
>
Agreed. A case in point. When Apple decided to go to flat design for its
desktop motive, Microsoft quickly followed them and dumped the Aero
desktop. While them deciding to follow Apple's design signals Microsoft
ceding the mantle of software preeminence (was always the case
considering their copy-over-create history) may have made some business
sense (debatable), what hadn't was them NOT even making Aero a
purchasable feature for those in their base who preferred the more
aesthetic skeumorphic design over the stick-art one. Even if they didn't
wish to continue to maintain Aero, they should have offered it up to a
3rd party or even open source. This, among other reasons, is why I've
stayed with Win7. Software Development 101, always offer a migration
path when re-designing proucts <sarcasm>Who do they think they are,
Mozilla!?<sarcasm/> Win11's new desktop seems to be an admission of
their mistake but even there the skimpy rounded corners and lack of Aero
transparency is strange.

2 pence worth

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

Sailfish graced us with on 3/18/2022 12:35 PM:
> Mayayana graced us with on 3/17/2022 5:22 AM:
>> "VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote
>>
>> | In fact, as I've done with several versions
>> | of Windows, I'll skip Windows 11, too.
>> |
>> | Windows 11: skipped
>> | Windows 10: usable
>> | Windows 8: skipped
>> | Windows 7: usable
>> | Windows Vista: skipped
>> | Windows XP: usable
>>
> <snip />
>
>> I find it interesting that MS have
>> always been a mix of brilliant and incompetent. They come
>> up with these ideas way ahead of everyone else. But they
>> have no idea of how to make products people want. They
>> just decide to vacuum wallets and then, almost as an
>> afterthought, try to come up with a gimmick to sell the
>> idea. Active Desktop is a great example. It was a half-baked
>> mess that could have been cooked up in a week. The premise?
>> Invite people to put ads on their own computer screens while
>> embedding IE into Explorer windows so that the courts couldn't
>> force them to remove it.
>>
> Agreed. A case in point. When Apple decided to go to flat design for its
> desktop motive, Microsoft quickly followed them and dumped the Aero
> desktop. While them deciding to follow Apple's design signals Microsoft
> ceding the mantle of software preeminence (was always the case
> considering their copy-over-create history) may have made some business
> sense (debatable), what hadn't was them NOT even making Aero a
> purchasable feature for those in their base who preferred the more
> aesthetic skeumorphic design over the stick-art one. Even if they didn't
> wish to continue to maintain Aero, they should have offered it up to a
> 3rd party or even open source. This, among other reasons, is why I've
> stayed with Win7. Software Development 101, always offer a migration
> path when re-designing proucts <sarcasm>Who do they think they are,
> Mozilla!?<sarcasm/> Win11's new desktop seems to be an admission of
> their mistake but even there the skimpy rounded corners and lack of Aero
> transparency is strange.
>
> 2 pence worth
>
s/motive/motif/

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

"Paul" <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote

|
| That requires the Ridgecrop fat32formatter program.
|

Thanks, but BootIt handles it fine. However, BootIt had
trouble getting at the disk. Apparently Win10 locked it.
Once I used Win10 to shrink C drive, I made partitions,
then I booted into BootIt and resized them.

"NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote

| - turn OFF the idiotic merging of icons on the taskbar: a) so you get a
| separate icon for every running instance of the same program

Yes, yes, yes. How did you do that? The settings I see don't
seem to give me that option, even though I was able to do
it in Win7. I hate having 3 Firefox or Notepad open and then
lokking at tiny icon-views to see which is which.

| - change the Windows (File) Explorer icon so it calls
"%windir%\explorer.exe
| /e,c:\": the extra parameters make sure the list of drives is expanded,
that
| the focus defaults to the C drive with its root drive open, and possibly
| something else
|

I'm liking the idea of an Explroer replacement, though
I haven't looked into it. The design is a disaster, what
with the ribbon, the lack of an up button, etc.