Would Personal Builds run win-11?

[retina]

Originally Posted by a1call

ETA: If win-11 can run on a Guest-Virtual-Machine and not on its host would indicate that lack of functionality on the host is by design and probably without any (proper) justification.

This is well known.

It is as easy as removing a single file during installation and Win11 will install and run fine without any TPM or other hardware things that MS claims are necessary.

It is purely for their benefit, not yours, to ensure you aren't doing anything they don't approve of.

[techn1ciaN]

Originally Posted by retina

It is as easy as removing a single file during installation and Win11 will install and run fine without any TPM or other hardware things that MS claims are necessary.

It is purely for their benefit, not yours, to ensure you aren't doing anything they don't approve of.

A more charitable interpretation might be that they're trying to rehabilitate the reputation of Windows as malware-riddled and prone to attacks. Anecdotally, this is still a commonly held viewpoint among almost all of the "non-computer" people I know even though it's not inherently true (competitors aren't more structurally secure, just less profitable to attack). Mandating Secure Boot and the use of a TPM, if heavy-handed, might make a real dent in this. (Or it might not since most real-world Windows malware seems to target old versions anyway, for their lack of currency on security updates.)

As long as the security mandates are trivial to bypass I don't see a significant problem. Power users can still do whatever they want (including just skipping Windows and installing Linux instead) and the "average" user probably is at least marginally better-protected.

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by techn1ciaN

I run Prime95 P-1 and LL, GPUOwl LL, and MFaktC.

Why LL with its inferior error checking and full 100%+ cost DC, not PRP with GEC and proof generation and ~0.5% certification cost?

[techn1ciaN]

Originally Posted by kriesel

Why LL with its inferior error checking and full 100%+ cost DC, not PRP with GEC and proof generation and ~0.5% certification cost?

I DC full-time. I do run FTCs as PRP, but don't plan to do them more than occasionally until GIMPS is done with double-checking. I'll switch to PRP-DC if LL DCs run out before that point.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by techn1ciaN

but don't plan to do them more than occasionally until GIMPS is done with double-checking. I'll switch to PRP-DC if LL DCs run out before that point.

We are looking at the 2030-2032 time frame for all the DC's to get done. DC's can be run as PRP with certs, even if the FTC was an LL. Ken will obviously have an opinion about that.

[Xyzzy]

W10 versus W11 - virtualization based security (VBS) :

[techn1ciaN]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

We are looking at the 2030-2032 time frame for all the DC's to get done.

That's an NaN% improvement on what that timeframe was when I joined GIMPS in 2016. It's cool to me that the project having no more (non-transient) unverified results is a real, achievable goal now, and I want to be part of getting there if possible.

[Xyzzy]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

W10 versus W11 - virtualization based security (VBS) :

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/wi...-hvci-security