On Wed, 8/13/2025 10:55 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 20:33:11 +0200 (CEST), Postmaster <Postmaster@Offline.com> wrote:
Windows 10 support will end on October 14, 2025, and users are
encouraged to upgrade to Windows 11 for continued updates and
security fixes.
How many computers will be trashed? Microsoft Tells Over 200
Million Windows 10 Users To Trash Their PCs!
Microsoft has reiterated that every Windows user with hardware
that doesn't meet the minimum requirements of Windows 11 should
upgrade their PCs or purchase a compatible device. According to
Microsoft, this includes an estimated 240 million Windows 10
users.
Microsoft openly promotes tossing your laptop into a big pile of
e-waste
You'll have to throw out your old PC or risk security issues if
the device can't upgrade to Windows 11.
https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-openly-promotes-tossing-your-laptop-into-a-big-pile-of-e-waste
Working Windows 10 computers will then probably appreciate in value, edspecially those with the 32-bit version installed, as they will
still be able run programs and access data that the reduced
functionality of Windows 11 can't cope with.
I tested this recently, and it no longer looks practical to me.
It's going to take work and research on your part, to make
a good install recipe that works for everyone.
OS Version Baseline RAM consumption
Win10 32-bit 2015 0.35GB
Win10 32-bit 2025 1.6 GB (max allowed is a little less than 3GB, maybe a low-VRAM video card would help.
There is no suitable driver for my FX5200 128MB card.)
That means a naive user has to work within a 1.4GB limitation, and the
part that sucked, is the July Patch Tuesday, bombed out on low RAM
and did not complete.
It is possible that the wasted RAM, is the sandbox-OS file in RAM,
but I'm not sure about that.
I'm unaware of a good utility for displaying why things like this are happening.
The sandbox-OS file on a 64-bit OS is around 2.2GB in size (that's a mini-copy of the OS environment, for sandboxing via virtualization). You used to be
able to suppress this, via the runtime test the OS would do, to see whether
it had the resources for sandboxing. It would not install the sandbox file,
if there wasn't room.
It would be interesting to see if the OS would stop doing that, if you turn
off VT-X. But unfortunately, VT-X is not "required" to make virtualization work, so pulling the rug from underneath the OS, does not guarantee
you will get a desired result. If you could disable Hyper-V completely,
maybe that would reduce the appetites of the OS in question (there is
a switch in BCDEDIT for that, if you want to test).
[From a Google on the topic...]
"To turn off this service, I use the command line with the command
bcdedit /set hypervisorlaunchtype off
which turns off the "virtualization based security" service.
"
Summary: You need to be a level 39 Wizard, to make this work :-/
Everyone needs a hobby. Maybe you can beat on the OS enough,
to get the RAM needed to finish Patch Tuesday.
Paul
--- MBSE BBS v1.1.2 (Linux-x86_64)
* Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)