Should we remove all Windows 10 releases?

[mrpijey]

There's been quite a bit of complaints that Windows 10 is boring, that people want specific filters to remove it from the DB and update logs, that nothing is good about Windows 10, that it uses up too much of our archive space etc etc....

So my question is, should we remove all the Windows 10 builds from the FTP? Please motivate why so we can get a better understanding of why you think it should be kept/removed.

Thank you.

[Applegame12345]

I think early Windows 10 releases (such as 9780-10176) and releases from oddball labs such as rs_xbox should be kept on FTP.

[Resident007]

I guess history is history, no matter if it’s boring or not. IMO, we should keep all the releases.

[mrpijey]

I think early Windows 10 releases (such as 9780-10176) and releases from oddball labs such as rs_xbox should be kept on FTP.

So basically anything that led up to the first Win10 RTM then, and nothing after it? Considering Windows 10 is in a continuing development cycle and not fixed like previous OS generations...

[Lucas Brooks]

I think it will be good if we can have a separate FTP for Windows 10 builds and make it open to everybody (because most of them came from the internet). Windows 10 builds are annoying but we certainly don't want them to disappear. Maybe we can put them on archive.org. If all Windows 10 builds are removed, the archive size will get below 100TB and surely you don't want to see that happening. Early pre-RTM Windows 10 builds are interesting though.

[AlphaBeta]

It would be interesting to observe download stats for said releases.

I won't be surprised if it turns out that more than 75% of Windows 10 stuff has never been touched by a living creature ever since uploaded.

[Lukas Marsik]

I think early Windows 10 releases (such as 9780-10176) and releases from oddball labs such as rs_xbox should be kept on FTP.

So basically anything that led up to the first Win10 RTM then, and nothing after it? Considering Windows 10 is in a continuing development cycle and not fixed like previous OS generations...

"and releases from oddball labs such as rs_xbox"
The latest oddball release is from July 2019

Maybe knowing what you are asking about in advance isn't a bad idea

[Windows Thunderstruck]

I guess history is history, no matter if it’s boring or not. IMO, we should keep all the releases.

I agree with this statement, Resident007.

I think all of the Windows 10 builds should not be removed, as I think in my opinion, no matter how boring these builds are, these builds are an integral part of BA's collection.

[qta3426]

There are many builds and languages that have not been downloaded yet.

Or it looks good to use the SVF(SmartVersion) patch on Windows 10 and Server 2016 ~.

[Battler]

I see where the complaints are coming from, and a lot of them probably have to do with people disliking Windows 10 in general, there's been quite a few people I've met so far that categorically refuse to touch Windows 10 and have sworn to stay on eg. Windows 7 until it falls out of support.

The other complaints, that I remember, tended to be not about why Windows 10 builds are uploaded and preserved, but about why they are being given seemingly more attention than older stuff.

As for myself, I'm fine either way. My only concern is that because Windows 10 is on a continuous update cycle, and pretty much most (if not all) of the builds are released to the public, this is going to put an increased strain on the FTP.

[Overdoze]

As for myself, I'm fine either way. My only concern is that because Windows 10 is on a continuous update cycle, and pretty much most (if not all) of the builds are released to the public, this is going to put an increased strain on the FTP.

I agree with this.

[mrpijey]

I think it will be good if we can have a separate FTP for Windows 10 builds and make it open to everybody (because most of them came from the internet). Windows 10 builds are annoying but we certainly don't want them to disappear. Maybe we can put them on archive.org. If all Windows 10 builds are removed, the archive size will get below 100TB and surely you don't want to see that happening. Early pre-RTM Windows 10 builds are interesting though.

I don't care about quantity, only quality. And we won't have a separate FTP for them nor make them "free" as it would not make any difference other than more of our precious bandwidth would be used up, and it would put a lot more strain on the server taking away bandwidth from those getting other stuff than Win10. And it would still take up the same amount of space on the drive, which is what this poll is about - freeing up space by removing stuff everyone seems to have an issue with. And if I put them all on archive.org then that's effectively the same as removing them from our FTP. I can technically upload it all to archive.org, but then I will also stop bothering with them, just like with the previous OEM recovery discs. Mind you I also have tons and tons of Win10 RTM releases for future release, UUP packs and all kinds of stuff which takes up a lot of space.

And "all came from the internet" can be applied to a lot more releases on the FTP, so that won't hold either.

It would be interesting to observe download stats for said releases.

I won't be surprised if it turns out that more than 75% of Windows 10 stuff has never been touched by a living creature ever since uploaded.

Which is perhaps why they should be removed. No one bothered with the iOS stuff either and one has to make some priorities. It's quite a bit of work keeping track of the Win10 releases... but again, we have a lot of releases people have not downloaded, doesn't make them less valuable. People may not be interested in Win10 stuff today, but one day people will collect them just as they collected XP, Win7 and Vista builds etc today.

There are many builds and languages that have not been downloaded yet.

Or it looks good to use the SVF(SmartVersion) patch on Windows 10 and Server 2016 ~.

I did look into that tool, but it seems like a complete mess to use. I need to be able to script the creation of the svf files but can't seem to find any good ways of doing it. Any recommendations?

[qta3426]

https://forums.mydigitallife.net/thread ... pts.79415/

This page may be helpful.

I usually use this method.

I make Makepatch.cmd, svf.cmd.

The svf.cmd file loads the files with call makepatch.cmd.

example

Code: Select all

call makepatch en_windows_10_consumer_editions_version_1909_x64_dvd_be09950e.iso ar_windows_10_consumer_editions_version_1909_x64_dvd_cc574656.iso

en_windows_10_consumer_editions_version_1909_x64_dvd_be09950e.iso to ar_windows_10_consumer_editions_version_1909_x64_dvd_cc574656.iso

You can add call makepatch to underscores to handle multiple files.

Makepatch.cmd file all script.

Code: Select all

@echo off

if [%1]==[] (echo Usage: MakePatch.cmd SourceFile.ext DestFile.ext & exit /b)

if [%2]==[] (echo Usage: MakePatch.cmd SourceFile.ext DestFile.ext & exit /b)

set smvexec=smv.exe
set svfname=%~n2.svf

cd /d "%~dp0"
if exist "%svfname%" (echo %svfname% already exists & exit /b)

"%smvexec%" BuildPatch "%svfname%" "%~1" "%~2" -nbhashbits 24 -compressratio 192 -sha1 -sha256
echo -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
exit /b

smv.exe is SmartVersion file. %~1 is source, %~2 is destination.

When using this method, only the other parts will be saved.

If you are SVF patching Arabic Business Edition in an Arabic Consumer Edition, you will have only 100MB of files left.

[mrpijey]

https://forums.mydigitallife.net/thread ... pts.79415/

This page may be helpful.

Could you download the scripts etc found in that thread for me?

[Exemptus]

I voted to remove, but that is just because I think the ratio between preservation interest and resources taken by W10 builds is too low to be sustainable (and I'm not personally interested in them). Maybe this is too radical, but it was a yes/no/meh question, and it is a bit more nuanced that that. The right balance would be perhaps to preserve early builds and certain milestones. I'm for the pragmatic approach here - if the builds are in high demand then they should stay, but otherwise we should be more selective.

[com1337]

I personally would keep anything before 10240 on the FTP (IIIRC that's the first RTM) and then put the rest in cold storage.

[qazmko1029]

Just confused, why we should remove windows 10? Although Microsoft opened Windows Insider and make development quick(buggy) and boring for collectors, there're still a clear line for what feature added/removed/hided/etc, much more clear then any Windows before. These builds are of value, good or not.
If they really have taken up so much space, I suggest we can save them as UUP cabs and/or delete some less useful components/languages/skus and make all these general rules for later windows 10 builds. But they should be publicly saved in any aspect i can get.

[beta.a.brian]

I think that other languages should be removed. Just keep English and language packs should do the rest.

[TinaMeineKatze]

I voted "I don't care" (personally), but this is also a bit more nuanced. I am a Linux-User now and only interested in the older stuff I got my hands on as teenager (some nostalgia), so I won't ever download them personally.

But I also understand the question regarding preservation interest: I believe BA has done a great job saving software that would otherwise been lost for ever in many cases. Maybe in 10 years or something, BA will be needed for people trying to understand what Windows 11* or something came to be conceptually.

And by then, most of the builds will surely be lost if no one except for BA archives them.

I remember some builds that were once floating around in the early 90's that are now lost. This was always very frustrating to me. So they should probably be kept for future generations to come, even though I don't care about them personally.

*I know they said there won't be any Windows 11, but I use this as a metaphor for very-far-away builds like in 20 years or something.

Is it maybe technically possible to compress all of them, like, into .tar.gz-files or something that has a high compression rate, but allows only extracting one file quite easily?

We could then have a site where you enter your username and password (for the ftp, e.g.) and then and only then you see the Windows 10 builds and can click on one, which internally causes the server to extract that one file and offer it over https? This should be easy to implement technically and would probably save a lot of space. You can even keep a counter of downloads then and, via a cron-job for example, switch out the top 10 builds to the ftp or something. This would stabilize quite quickly, I believe.

[mrpijey]

https://forums.mydigitallife.net/thread ... pts.79415/

Thank you. I will look into perhaps creating patches for the original stuff to reduce the total archive size, but I will not mix SKUs, just languages to make sure we still have proper unique editions.

I think that other languages should be removed. Just keep English and language packs should do the rest.

Unfortunately language packs don't exist for all builds.

Just confused, why we should remove windows 10? Although Microsoft opened Windows Insider and make development quick(buggy) and boring for collectors, there're still a clear line for what feature added/removed/hided/etc, much more clear then any Windows before. These builds are of value, good or not.
If they really have taken up so much space, I suggest we can save them as UUP cabs and/or delete some less useful components/languages/skus and make all these general rules for later windows 10 builds. But they should be publicly saved in any aspect i can get.

Well, I asked because so many people complained about us having them and archiving them.

[winnt32]

The issue isn't windows 10, it's having every edition of every language of every build of windows 10.

[DanielOosterhuis]

I think they should not be removed simply for archival reasons. But, if the Windows 10 releases start pushing the resources for the FTP thin, then they should be the first on the chopping block if absolutely ncessary. I don't have any reason to believe that's currently the case, though.

[mrpijey]

I will see if I can use the patcher qta3426 posted about to see if we can reduce the overall size, then we can keep them and still not go bananas with the archive size. I tried xdelta3 before but it was inefficient with these ISOs so I abandoned the idea, but Smartversion is a lot more efficient with these so I'll try that.

[qta3426]

The files required here are English 32-bit and 64-bit ISO files.



SVF patch to create file from English to another language.



SVF patch to create file from English to Chinese SVF then China SKU.



SVF patch to create file from English to another language and then Education SKU.

In fact, if you keep everything in ISO, it will be over 300GB, but if you store files in SVF, you can keep them within 20GB.

While files that create wim with DISM or ImageX are compatible and SVF patch sizes are small(If same build), if you create wim using DISM, ImageX <-> wimlib-image, or another version of wimlib-imagex, the same Windows 10 build will also increase SVF patch size (1 GB).



source : https://twitter.com/wzornet/status/735547297690423298

[johnleakedfan]

I might lean towards removing but not outright because I definitely wouldn't want to remove all of them, but rather being able to greatly reduce overall size and whatnot instead of having to truly remove stuff for good. I didn't wanna factor in my interest/disinterest with Windows 10 as a whole when voting (although I think it's very decent, once I got used to it).

It does seem to get a bit ridiculous when you look at the ratio of Win10 to other stuff concerning overall size.
Qta3426's ideas definitely seem to be more practical in this situation.