On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:47:09 GMT Johnny B Good
Post by Johnny B GoodIntrigued, I tried the download link and was able to grab the file
to add to my modest collection of 64bit win7 isos. I ran the same
md5sum command and it checked out ok. However, I noticed this file was
an exact filesize match to another 64 bit iso image file which ISTR
torrent downloading a few years back.
Aren't all versions the same apart from the file that tells them which
version they are? You could try running a diff on the mounted ISOs to
see which files have changed.
There's no point in my doing that since MSFT have been modifying the way
the installer handles the Licence key verification/ qualification with
each new windows version. Vista and win7 may possibly still rely on a
setupp.ini (or something similar) as used by the NT5.x installers but I
had no need to investigate this aspect of those OSes (nor for win8.x
which is when I believe MSFT started getting a little more inventive
about how the installer validated the license keys).
With win10, afaict, the only real distinction is the differentiation
between home and professional versions regardless of bitedness (32 or
64). A home version of win10 will install against an OEM or retail key
for all variants of the home editions keys (premium, penultimate,
ultimate, postultimate platinum yada yada yada...) whilst the
Professional versions (standard, medium, large, yada yada yada...) may
only install against their respective OEM and retail keys to the
exclusion of Volume Licence Keys (VLK) or possibly not - I'm only
guessing from the impression I've gained from monitoring the poor buggers
asking endless questions (mostly about where the feck MSFT is going with
this latest "Ship of State" by consumers who feel they've all been herded
into steerage class accommodation) in the a.c.o.w-10 group.
However, ICBW in regard of the license validation details - I simply
gained an impression of a greater flexibility in licensing options from a
common distribution media for Home editions (and assumed a similar
flexibility for the Professional editions).
Thankfully, since I retired from the PC Repair business late last year,
my interest in things MSFT are now only of an academic nature, especially
as I also jumped ship almost 6 months earlier for the sleek lines of a
Linux "Tea Clipper", complete with retro fittings, lovingly handcrafted
by the ship's carpenter along with seemingly ancient methods of 'working
the ship'.
Make no mistake, Linux is no substitute for MS windows. I've not been
able to find a *nix desktop distro that would be a suitable substitute
for even the brain dead winXP version of win2k when it comes to the all
important Desktop Environment user friendliness of win2k's classic
desktop.
For anyone used to win2k, the shock of landing in a Linux world of
clunky retroness must be all the greater than for Vista and win7 users.
However, afaiac, such a retro desktop environment is a small price to pay
to avoid the win10 horrors that faced the win7 and win8.2 users that
succumbed to the pressure (whether as a conscious choice or simply by
accident) to upgrade for free and which still await the consumer on his/
her next desktop PC purchase.
Although I have mixed feelings about Linux (I plumped for Linux Mint
17.1 KDE 64), I'm quite glad to have quit MSFT's treadmill of never
ending upgrades to increasingly worsening versions of windows. I think on
balance that I've made the right choice. I simply don't have the right
temperament to use windows 10 without losing my sanity. I'm simply not
the consumer material MSFT are pandering to.
--
Johnny B Good