Windows 11 General Discussion

[Onasi]

Can I change a look or theme of win 95/98 on 11th?

Sure you can. I am not sure why you’d want to, but knock yourself out:

 

[Octopuss]

Sure you can. I am not sure why you’d want to, but knock yourself out:

wow

 

[RUSerious]

Any W11 users try atlas os or talon or any other things to modify the OS?

I suppose NT Lite could be used to modify the iso as well?

To what end............I guess since "normal" people can't get LTSC / LTSC IoT, are there other options or tools that could get close to it?

All I use is StartAllBack. Fixes some niggling UI issues for me. Plus, lets me actually put the taskbar on the right! I have a widescreen monitor, taskbar on the bottom is such a stupid waste of space.

 

[Chrispy_]

I did a quick search but I think most of the results in this thread are out of date so I'll ask again and apologies if this is a repeat question, just link me to the relevant post please.

How do you install Windows 11 on a PC without hardware TPM, March 2025 edition, please?

AFAIK Microsoft has blocked the late-2024 way of doing it. 95% of the machines I deal with are modern systems with TPM but Windows 10 goes EOL in 9 months and there are plenty of decent systems that don't need to be e-wasted just because they don't run Windows 11 officially.

 

[vigor]

Sure you can. I am not sure why you’d want to, but knock yourself out:

I have to do all that to change it? What happend to just switch the theme with 1 click?

 

[Onasi]

@vigor
…brother, are you unironically asking why a modern OS doesn’t have a function to fall back to the UI from 1995 built in by default? It’s not “just a theme”, it’s a full on different interface. That’s just how it is.

@Chrispy_
Well, the cop out answer is that the LTSC IoT is the most hassle free way to get 11 on basically anything. Otherwise, just use Rufus - it has in-built tools for that. The latest 4.6 release works just fine.

 

[windwhirl]

I have to do all that to change it? What happend to just switch the theme with 1 click?

That still exists, though changing the actual style of the themes beyond wallpaper and color is either gone or hidden well enough it might as well be gone.

 

[lexluthermiester]

What is the real difference between Windows 11 and 10 or 8?

Performance wise, mostly margin of error with things generally favoring Win 10 and 11 over 8/8.1.

Online PC is the problem, an offline PC has never any problem, once online it starts to be problematic...

This is so true. Stand alone systems are very unlikely to ever have problems with vulnerabilities and malware.

Can I change a look or theme of win 95/98 on 11th?

Did you mean to ask if you can set a Windows 95/98 theme in Windows 11? Honestly, I have no idea. Never tried it. Maybe?

Sure you can. I am not sure why you’d want to, but knock yourself out:

There is this.
(didn't see this until I had posted a response and changed pages)

…brother, are you unironically asking why a modern OS doesn’t have a function to fall back to the UI from 1995 built in by default? It’s not “just a theme”, it’s a full on different interface. That’s just how it is.

This about sums it up. Though I have found that Windows XP themes do work partially on Windows 7 and 11.

 

[vgm]

Interesting. Are you sure those 24H2 images with Edge removed are with Windows Explorer unaffected? See post 5684 to see what I mean.

BTW, those ISOs seem to be without any of the auto-activation nonsense, thank you for not promoting piracy in this thread.

I have removed all edge components within program files x86 and retained system 32 webview to prevent system components and apps from breaking and its integrated with latest webview available.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Windows 11 is the buggiest OS since Vista.

I forgot to answer this. No, it's isn't. Vista was a mess, sure. Comparing 11 to it is silly. 24H2 is having lots of issues, but that a point release, not the whole of the OS.

I have removed all edge components within program files x86 and retained system 32 webview to prevent system components and apps from breaking and its integrated with latest webview available.

I'll take a look on one of my spare systems and chime back in.

 

[Octopuss]

Weirdly, I don't remember Vista having any other problems than having completely ridiculous hardware requirements. Well, that made it enough of a mess. On the other hand, on my back then high end PC I didn't notice anything terribly wrong - or I managed to forget it since

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Weirdly, I don't remember Vista having any other problems than having completely ridiculous hardware requirements. Well, that made it enough of a mess. On the other hand, on my back then high end PC I didn't notice anything terribly wrong - or I managed to forget it since

Vista was crap. SP3 finally saved it to make it a usable operating system.

Like most operating systems MS releases, it takes a few service packs to get it right.

Or they rename it...

Windows 8 point 1 - per example.
Windows 11 22h1, 22h2, 23h1, 32h2, 24h2

I guess Windows 11 has had the most work done to it these past few years. (Missing any h packs?)

High end? Well curiosity has me asking, what was this rig?!

 

[lexluthermiester]

Weirdly, I don't remember Vista having any other problems than having completely ridiculous hardware requirements.

There was that. However, it was mostly driver issues and programs not playing well with them.

Vista was crap. SP3 finally saved it to make it a usable operating system.

What?!? There was no SP3 for Vista. It had SP2 and that's it. Also;

Windblows

Please stop this. It's just not necessary.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

What?!? There was no SP3 for Vista. It had SP2 and that's it. Also;

Please stop this. It's just not necessary.

Well at least you said please. I appreciate that. I can edit the post.

SP0, SP1, SP2. That's 3 service packs. They do it like core counts. Can be confusing to some I suppose.

 

[lexluthermiester]

SP0, SP1, SP2. That's 3 service packs.

SP0 was RTM. That was the original release. It doesn't count as a service pack. There was only ever SP2. However, you're not wrong, SP1 solved most of the issues and SP2 neatly cleaned up the rest.
IMHO, Vista SP2 is a delightful OS, rock solid stable, good performing and smooth as silk.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

SP0 was RTM. That was the original release. It doesn't count as a service pack. The was only ever SP2. However, you're not wrong, SP1 solved most of the issues and SP2 neatly cleaned up the rest.
IMHO, Vista SP2 is a delightful OS, rock solid stable, good performing and smooth as silk.

According to them it counts as a service pack.

Yes, after SP2 ( by technicality) it was usable. Stable. I don't know. It was so bad at release, had to ditch it.

 

[lexluthermiester]

According to them it counts as a service pack.

I've never heard that before and I've been at this a long time. Regardless, we're sliding off topic...so I digress.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I've never heard that before and I've been at this a long time. Regardless, we're sliding off topic...so I digress.

No it's on topic. You had it right the first time.

W11 SP0 is original release without service pack (on disk** installer package).

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I forgot to answer this. No, it's isn't. Vista was a mess, sure. Comparing 11 to it is silly. 24H2 is having lots of issues, but that a point release, not the whole of the OS.


I'll take a look on one of my spare systems and chime back in.

Weirdly, I don't remember Vista having any other problems than having completely ridiculous hardware requirements. Well, that made it enough of a mess. On the other hand, on my back then high end PC I didn't notice anything terribly wrong - or I managed to forget it since

Vista wasn’t all that bad, IMO, and at least it started pushing some necessary software policy changes. UAC was annoying, but it really was an eye opener to just how many programs were going for elevated privileges. Also, NVIDIA had a lot of blame to shoulder for driver issues, as they basically refused to ship chipset drivers for Vista, and then they exited the chipset space entirely. In the end, Vista was the tyrant that made all the hard choices that ended up paving the way for Windows 7, which is arguably where MS peaked. We can’t say that about Windows 7, 8, 10, or 11, as their successors have been maybe a step forward and one or two steps back.

 

[londiste]

There was nothing wrong with Vista. Besides actually going for new technology and solutions. Plus all the stupidity with system requirements.
- UAC while annoying at first was what Linux users (and more importantly, security-focused parts of enterprise) had been asking for - in-place elevation. Microsoft had been talking about running software in non-admin rights at least since XP. Earlier, if we talk about NT or 2000 but these were in limited use by normal consumer users. This is literal long years, no enforcement and no direct impact for software so nobody bothered. When Vista came out, everyone and their cat rushed to update their software to not trigger UAC or minimize its occurrence. Which is unequivocally a good thing.
- A new driver model made it necessary for manufacturers to create/update drivers and many just didn't.
- The whole window compositioning overhaul and many other UI bits were new as well, pulling Windows technologically up from ancient tech.
- The biggest problem was system requirements - Microsoft caved in to demands of OEMs and Intel which resulted in minimum required RAM to be stated as 512MB which was never really enough for it. And Intel lobbied to have the Intel GMA iGPUs to be compatible for the hardware accelerated UI which... they might be considered capable but it took a couple years for it to actually work flawlessly.

By the way, the timing was probably not a coincidence that it was during transition to 64-bit CPUs. Windows XP Pro x64 brought forth the limitations of that approach and there was a major change needed from that aspect as well. Vista took things to pretty nicely compatible 32 and 64-bit versions. 32-bit variant of Windows was offered up to middle of Windows 10 lifecycle.

While in the usual ship of Theseus form most of Windows components have been updated or replaces by now the core of it is still the same from Vista to current Windows 11 and probably for the foreseeable future as well.

 

[Octopuss]

I remember working in subdivision of local HP branch that was doing outsourced support for one bank around 2010.
The machines we worked on were absolutely shitty underhardwared HP notebooks running 32bit Vista. No SSDs. Crap CPUs. And all the corporate junk installed, permanently running disk contents scans (looking for any software we weren't supposed to install). Those fucking things took FIVE MINUTES TO BOOT.
I still get some PTSD creeps remembering vague bits of that job.

 

[Onasi]

W11 SP0 is original release without service pack (on disk** installer package).

Nah, RTM is RTM in 11s case. MS no longer uses SP nomenclature and it wouldn’t make sense anyway - 10 and 11 are rolling release operating systems with major milestone point releases once a year. Or, you know, sometimes NOT since 22H2 stuck around for two years (23H2 was just a regular enablement KB for a couple new features and the core OS didn’t change).

 

[londiste]

Nah, RTM is RTM in 11s case. MS no longer uses SP nomenclature and it wouldn’t make sense anyway - 10 and 11 are rolling release operating systems with major milestone point releases once a year. Or, you know, sometimes NOT since 22H2 stuck around for two years (23H2 was just a regular enablement KB for a couple new features and the core OS didn’t change).

Adding to this:

Service Pack can be thought of as a patch (or a group of patches which it really is) to the same Windows version. Most of the Windows 10 and Windows 11 big feature updates are technically not Service Packs any more but full blown new versions of Windows.

Updating from Windows 11 22H2 to Windows 11 24H2 for example is in Windows internal terms an OS upgrade, not a patch. Similar to say Windows 7 to Windows 8.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Don't forget Vista also brought about "ReadyBoost," which cached data to USB sticks to reduce swap times to spinning rust. This idea probably sounds absurd today, especially since USB 2 was still the standard when Vista launched (though USB3 was in the wings), but that's what the storage and RAM situation was like on many PCs back then. Vista exposed how bad the cheap PC situation was, but the OS ran pretty well on ample, fully-supported hardware. I had an nForce S754 setup at the time, and even though NVIDIA never properly supported Vista, it worked pretty well once there was enough RAM.

How does this tie to W11? Well, W11 is dropping lots of hardware that could actually run the OS perfectly fine. Which would you rather have, the option to try to run an OS on unsupported hardware, or have arbitrary limits that drop potentially "good enough" hardware? Vista was the former, 11 is the latter. Score one for Vista, IMO.

 

[R-T-B]

I've never heard that before and I've been at this a long time. Regardless, we're sliding off topic...so I digress.

I think he's confusing service pack and Service Pack Level (SPL) in Microsoft terminology. It's almost splitting hairs really, kind of like what on earth microsoft considers the "boot" or "system" partition. Easy to get confused because so similar.