Compact custom version of Windows 11 released

You're never too old to learn a few more tricks!
With that amount of ifs and required knowledge you can write off 99%+ of users. It's good that it works for you but everyone else please just run Linux if your system can't handle a modern version of Windows. Or buy a new PC.
 
With that amount of ifs and required knowledge you can write off 99%+ of users. It's good that it works for you but everyone else please just run Linux if your system can't handle a modern version of Windows. Or buy a new PC.
I agree!
:)
 
It's good that it works for you but everyone else please just run Linux if your system can't handle a modern version of Windows. Or buy a new PC.
Most will choose an unplanned spending on a new windows computer - for a simple reason - the complexity of using Linux versions and setting them to safe mode (which is naturally not there by default, like on Android) is orders of magnitude more difficult than in the usual Windows, moreover, usability/UI and usual hot keys map and basic elements of the Windows system (even the sane task manager and firewall) are a priori absent there. In all distributions without exception. Therefore, M$ with Windows is actually a monopoly on the planet. Corrupt (and interested in geopolitical leverage on other countries) US authorities helped M$ become a global monster. And the stupid population and the corrupt authorities of other countries helped them in this. As a result, we do not have any sane alternative today, especially given the accumulated code base.

While Apple processors have already far outperformed x86 to date, the Apple memory controller alone in the M2 Max is already 4+ times faster than the top i9 Raptor Lake for laptops (400GB/s vs 80-90GB/s).
 
Thanks but No Thanks
atlasos dot net is way better, faster and less telemetry Windows 10 is way better
All Windows users are gradually led to the fact that they will receive non-disabled SafeBoot, where M$ and software companies will tell them what to use and how. With non-switchable (w/o payment) advertising. There is no mention of espionage. It is the stupidity of the population and the connivance / corruption of populist politicians, elected by the stupid population and easily controlled by the owners of TNCs, that leads to the fact that the world is increasingly turning into a digital concentration camp for the freedom-loving remnants of progressive humanity. Then a new digital middle ages inevitably comes with its darkness and hopelessness for the individual.
 
Huh, neat. Having Microsoft Store but not WinSxS though? Well, I hope it at least still have winget. Though it basically mean no WSL and Android support, not sure about Hyper-V either.

Not that I'm going to bother installing it on a real machine -- installing Windows is always a hassle so I'm just going to use the one that comes with my laptop and that I've lightly debloated. Still, seems convenient to use on VM on my Linux machines.
 
I advise everyone not to forget what Intel and the US intelligence agencies do for you through the unswitchable Intel ME in every motherboard and laptop. If your computer is connected to a cable network with direct access to the Internet - it is 100% under their hood.
 
Uhh no. If you need a library function, you just link against the dll; its rare to ever have to statically link libraries, and you typically only do so for embedded systems where you actually care if literally anything (like said external libraries) change.

Even then, code that isn't executed doesn't cost sny RAM usage (again, barring embedded systems where things tend to be statically typed); the only thing you lose is storage space, but it's better to sacrifice a few MB and include the entire library then get punished when future upgrades end up wanting to use an expanded feature set.

Actually, that only works for the most common functionality, for example when working with the OS functions, or some very common libraries. In all other cases using a DLL has the same impact - yet another library entirely loaded into memory so that you can use a single function. Another app loads another DLL. Or even the same type of DLL, but a different version. And what's worse, often "same" DLLs aren't exactly the same after update. If they aren't completely feature-compatible and also bug-compatible, you get a very frequent case when a perfectly good app stops working after updating Windows, or updating some important common library.
 
You seem to be very new to code development. Significant (large) libraries (if the developers are not *****s) are never linked statically, but dynamically (which increases the speed requirements for processors, because dynamic linking is always slower than static assembly, when only the necessary blocks from libraries are connected).

Sure, very new to software development. Same as IBM is new.

DLLs don't make things any better, since DLLs are versioned, and it's possible your app is the only one using that version of DLL. And you're right, they should break libraries into smaller pieces, where some base libs would rarely change, but that's hard to do retroactively.

In a world with millions of programmers, library and app development is following the rules of evolution of life. Similar to those that designed tongue in a giraffe (check that out). Similar to putting the air pipe next to the feeding pipe in humans (which sometimes results in suffocating). In other words - evolution creates nasty imperfections which work most of the time, but one has to be very careful while using them.

It's often better to decouple your app from too many dependencies, than to constantly use dependencies "to be safer" or "to have less code" which in the end actually produces unsafe, less reliable and slow result. As one famous programmer said: "A little bit of redundancy is better than a little bit of dependency".
 
Last edited:
Even then, code that isn't executed doesn't cost sny RAM usage (again, barring embedded systems where things tend to be statically typed); the only thing you lose is storage space, but it's better to sacrifice a few MB and include the entire library then get punished when future upgrades end up wanting to use an expanded feature set.

Sorry?? Code that isn't executed does not cost any RAM?? In a DLL used by an app? Since when???

If your code is using a DLL, the library will be loaded (if it wasn't before) when your app is loaded. And it will equally waste RAM whether you call any function in it or not. The OS will not load just the function you use from a DLL.

The only way that library won't be using any space is if you use a static library with a function that is marked for inlining. In that case the compiler will copy the entire function code into your app. Exactly the same as copying it yourself, except this happens automatically.

But if you're using a DLL, that library will be loaded and linked to your app dynamically. And it will eat RAM. At least one copy of it.
 
Last edited:
The problem for the developer is precisely that he has no confidence in the proper operation of the code of the dynamically linked library in different, newer versions (and even more so, this is excluded in the old ones). Therefore, despite the possible presence of the same functionality, Windwos is forced to load several copies of the libraries into memory, even if the functions the developer needs work properly in new versions, as he needs (which he simply does not know about).

As a result, DLL Hell starts in memory. When 10 programs load the same library but different versions.

Static linking is of course an option. But it is also not always possible, because. one function can pull a hundred more and the size of the exe will grow many times over.

Finding a balance between these two extremes is not a trivial task, although it can be automated.

Unfortunately, there is no sane mechanism to find out exactly whether a function works exactly the same in the new version as it did in the old one. Often the necessary things are not officially documented at all, sometimes this is a natural software hack.

Even the developers of M$ themselves have been caught in anti-market practices more than once by using undocumented public functions in public libraries, which should be punished under antitrust law.

That is why software development is such a complex and creative job, why it is highly paid (when the bosses really get hot) and often not enough, from the point of view of a developer who invests in it intellectual costs that are clearly disproportionate to pay.

The complexity of software is growing exponentially, and the human mind is limited, with all the automation of processes, and large teams and splitting tasks into simpler blocks, leads to lower quality software in reality, because. overall control slips away like architectural optimization...

A living example of W11 that can't get out of the beta testing stage on paying customers and for this reason there is still no stable version worthy of an LTSC level release.

The development process is increasingly reminiscent of dancing with tambourines, rather than strict discipline with careful output control.

The world is definitely heading towards a digital collapse...
 
Why wouldn't you just use Ubuntu then if you don't believe you're missing any features? Still matches your hardware requirements and actively updated.

Btw, please consider not using the term gimped.. quite offensive to the disabled community. Just a thought. Obviously you are free to say whatever you want.
BTW "disabled" is really quite offensive to the physically and mentally challenged community. They don't feel any less able just because their IQ is below 80 for example. Sometimes they are challenged to tie their shoelaces in the same time as other people but they get it done; so in no way feel "disabled"; particularly given the common meaning of disable in the tech community; the hosts of this forum - "disable" meaning "switch off". They are in no way "switched off". Please don't take any of this as a personal insult since I like the original commenter will be using terminalogy with specific meaning to the tech community rather than the community at large. Words like "Gimped" and "Disabled" have specific meaning in the tech community that they don't have in the community at large. It would be better for you in your understanding of peoples comments not to mix up the meanings.
 
Programmers are getting lazier and lazier. Long time ago if you needed a function that takes 2 lines of code, you'd write it yourself. Or copy it from a library and insert the source in your code.

Nowadays they include a 100 MB library just to use a single function from it. Do that 10 times, by each of 200 programmers, and you get a slow brontosaurus of an app. Moore's Law curve for CPUs looks very flat compared to the Slug's Law for software development, which is killing performance.

Though, some would say that brakes are more important than engine. In which case we have very safe software. Speed won't kill us.
Its not laziness since it is intentional and a lot of effort goes into it. The programmers (and their families) very livelihood depends on the continuous revision of code to justify their salaries. It is a lot of work to continuously find "bugs - intentionally flawed code written by previous programmers for current programmers to find and fix" and "new features - code to change the look and feel without effecting functionality plus built in bugs for future programmers to fix". This is really hard work and requires a considerable amount of creativity, so calling programmers lazy is an untrue statement.
 
Its not laziness since it is intentional and a lot of effort goes into it. The programmers (and their families) very livelihood depends on the continuous revision of code to justify their salaries. It is a lot of work to continuously find "bugs - intentionally flawed code written by previous programmers for current programmers to find and fix" and "new features - code to change the look and feel without effecting functionality plus built in bugs for future programmers to fix". This is really hard work and requires a considerable amount of creativity, so calling programmers lazy is an untrue statement.

You're right. It's very similar to pharmaceuticals producing a cure for disease A that produces a disease B which of course needs a new cure (that produces a new disease). I didn't realize IT and medicine have become so closely related.
 
People tend to turn everything into a routine and walking in a circle, if it feeds, rather than looking for new ways and solutions. Because the search for the new, the unknown and the attendant risks is even more energy-consuming and dangerous for prosperity than the search for other people's errors in the code in a circle.

This is not only "medicine", which has finally lost its touch of "sacredness" since 2020, but in general any sphere of human activity where, instead of results and moving forward, you can walk in a circle (or a very slowly, controlled spiral in the interests of the beneficiaries of this market niche) . Where the process is more important than the result. But again, who are the judges? And judges are consumers, I.e. customers of goods and services. If they allow themselves to be fooled over and over again, passing off as the "result" of walking in circles, or the growth of efficiency and progress many times slower than it could be, then who is to blame? Again, customers who allow themselves to be fooled.

The growth of the population and, at the same time, the ever-increasing decrease in the really productive layer of civilization, leads to the fact that the remaining, much larger part (more than 3/4 of the population today) diligently depicts violent activity in running on the spot from the point of view of the development of civilization and scientific and technical progress. In a personal attempt to survive and constantly deducing his own formula for success - minimum effort for maximum pay.

Because of this, today even "big" science has become a collection of imitators of scientific activity (about which there are already thousands of articles written by conscientious scientists), who have reached a sufficient intellectual level to deceive venture capital and the government as a provider of grants, I.e. their clients and auditors.
 
Back