66 replies to this topic

[sbaeder]

Why is it that so many WinBuilder projects include so many non-essentials that are pre-selected for inclusion in their PE builds?

My GUESS is that it is just a matter of the developer has them "selected" for testing (and to scratch his own particular itch) and just may not think about deselecting them before packaging it up for release...

[Arvy]

Yeah, you're probably right, and I suspect I'm just wasting space here. But just a little project coordination and leadership could go a long way toward making things much easier for people who, like some who've posted here, would like to start small and simple and then (maybe) work their way up gradually to the more complex non-essential stuff.

Believe it or not, getting the whole kitchen sink tossed into an initial start-up PE build does tend to overwhelm some people.

[Steptoe]

....., and I suspect I'm just wasting space here

No...there are quite a few posts like yours and mine..
Also expessing the tendecy of programers showing of, and or have a lack of understanding of the end user...be it say Nero, virus scvan progs what ever
If one is going to the shopping there is no need for a Mac Truck

[larioteo]

That is the reason why I searched for such a Project,

less is more,
App Scripts can be easily added by the User at his own, no need to blow the package,
A Project itselve should be as easy as possible.

The Buildtime is not important when the result is perfect, why i should not wait 5 or 20 minutes more?

And so on.

[Wonko the Sane]

Very good.

Wonko approves of this "return to the basics".

The essence is the different uses of the build different people do.

Some history:

PE's were born as minimal Pre-installing Environment".

BartPE showed us that they could also be made into minimal OS for recovery purposes.

Then people started using it as a (NOT anymore minimal) OS replacement.

Everyone started adding to it any possible bloatware around, mostly because "I do it because I can do it" and the "art of minimal builds" was lost.

Maybe it's time to go back to the roots.

In the past some attempts were made to better "modularize" the builds, with very little or no effect on the "mainstream" projects.

I call this syndrome that gets most (very nice and good developers) "featuritis" , we have several examples of apps/projects that started "right" (simply doing whatever they were supposed to do) and little by little became of the "I can do also this and that" type.

Additionally there is a number of (as well good and nice people ) that care for "looks" and in order to get the build look nice add "eye candy" things, often needing (otherwise completely unneeded) dependencies.

A good example is the shell used.

Even going to GUI instead of commandline, the simplicity and speed of things like blackbox or BB lean are not usually appreciated by the majority of members, that like to have the same "Explorer" shell they are used to in "normal" OS.

Since someone talked about Nero (one of the most reknown bloatwares around) and Nero is shipped with a number of actual CD/DVD writers, people are used to it and want it in the PE, when we have IMGBURN, that besides being freeware is also portable.

The other "obsession" I see around is that for "shortcuts" and "Start menu items", something that is very handy on "real" OS but actually UNneeded on a "repair technician" PE.

What about a new initiative "Back to the future"?
For putting together a very lean PE, with ONLY the BARELY needed functionalities and "everything else" in the form of either "completely portable" or - even better - "post-build additions"?
sanbarrow's MOA at a given point took IMHO the right turn, but then it seemed like noone or very few people were interested in such a "modular" approach....


Wonko

[homes32]

All of this leads to a question which, although it would seem to be an obvious one here in this development forum, is probably going to bring me a lot of flak for asking. But, what the heck, I'll ask anyway. At my age, I've long ago developed a hide that is pretty much flameproof.

Why is it that so many WinBuilder projects include so many non-essentials that are pre-selected for inclusion in their PE builds?

The Win7PE_SE project (from which this "skeleton" was extracted) is certainly not alone in that repect, but I'd almost given up on it until al_jo showed us exactly how minimalist it could be made. I can understand that human nature and the desire to "show off" any project's full potential are probably significant factors. But, from the standpoint of not overwheming the end user, wouldn't it make more sense to pre-select ONLY the barebones essentials and let the user add all other options according to his or her actual needs?

Especially for poor old geeks like me who are never quite sure what can safely be eliminated (and who are a bit lazy besides) it seems like a reasonable question. But for those who are strongly inclined to the opposite opinion, please aim carefully at the target and don't hit any innocent bystanders.

The main reason is that the majority of people want to have support for extracting archives, browsing the internet, editing the registry, and opening common file types such as bmp/jpg/.txt/.rft/.chm "out-of-the-box"

the goal is to have a project that has the basics setup by default for the majority while keeping included app scripts to a minimum and still provide plenty of extensibility for advanced uses to tweak and add scripts. for the minority that want bare metal skeleton to simply uncheck a couple of scripts if they can be bothered to do so. if a script can be unchecked then it is safe to exclude. it doesn't get any easier than that.

[pscEx]

The main reason is that the majority of people want to have support for extracting archives, browsing the internet, editing the registry, and opening common file types such as bmp/jpg/.txt/.rft/.chm "out-of-the-box"

A very good hint!

Next upload of nativeEx_multiPE I'll insert standard associations (and the components / apps to perform).
(Unfortunatelly I made the last upload some minutes ago, so it may take some time ... )

Peter

[Brito]

for the minority that want bare metal skeleton to simply uncheck a couple of scripts

That is the main reason why the download center provides the three download types for each project as minimal, normal and full.

Avoids the need for users to manually deselect scripts when downloading, reducing the margin for error that occurs when you deselect something that is critical for the project to run.

[homes32]

That is the main reason why the download center provides the three download types for each project as minimal, normal and full.

Avoids the need for users to manually deselect scripts when downloading, reducing the margin for error that occurs when you deselect something that is critical for the project to run.

exactly. once/if win7pe_se gets a download server this option will be used.

[Brito]

Download servers for each project can be created without pain.

Just check options inside a winbuilder.exe to generate the updates file and upload everything onto a server.

Then share the winbuilder.exe with the winbuilder.ini that contains the location of the project server for anyone who wants to try it out.

---

After a while, the new project usually ends up at the official download center list when it has been tested.



Some years ago, wb came with integrated FTP to upload the project rigth away: http://reboot.pro/2035/ but nowadays it only generates the .ini and .html files required for creating the server and the upload part is responsibility of the developer.

[homes32]

Download servers for each project can be created without pain.

Just check options inside a winbuilder.exe to generate the updates file and upload everything onto a server.

Then share the winbuilder.exe with the winbuilder.ini that contains the location of the project server for anyone who wants to try it out.

---

After a while, the new project usually ends up at the official download center list when it has been tested.



Some years ago, wb came with integrated FTP to upload the project rigth away: http://reboot.pro/2035/ but nowadays it only generates the .ini and .html files required for creating the server and the upload part is responsibility of the developer.

big reason win7pe_se is not on a server yet is because long since debated topic of the bundled wimfltr.sys/wimmount.sys/wimgapid.dll which are required for mounting tasks and are not redistributable according to MS licensing. great efforts have been made with the upcoming release to resolve this issue. so that in the future we can perhaps make win7pe_se available on a reboot server without fear of causing reboot.pro trouble with Microsoft or provoking the wrath of Wonko The Sane

final decision will be up to ChrisR.

[pscEx]

big reason win7pe_se is not on a server yet is because long since debated topic of the bundled wimfltr.sys/wimmount.sys/wimgapid.dll which are required for mounting tasks and are not redistributable according to MS licensing. great efforts have been made with the upcoming release to resolve this issue. so that in the future we can perhaps make win7pe_se available on a reboot server without fear of causing reboot.pro trouble with Microsoft

Just for record: IMO I already published a solution 18 month ago: http://reboot.pro/96...dpost__p__83807

Peter

[homes32]

Just for record: IMO I already published a solution 18 month ago: http://reboot.pro/96...dpost__p__83807

Peter

yep. extracting needed files from source is the solution we are using.

[Brito]

Just for record: IMO I already published a solution 18 month ago

For this solution to be used, it would need to be executed automatically from the project if it hadn't been applied before.

Or perhaps installed during the project build and then uninstalled when the project concludes.

[pscEx]

yep. extracting needed files from source is the solution we are using.

I understand that my solution eventually has not been efficient.

But I would like to know whether there is a better solution to e.g. my published:

ShellExecute,Hide,%Tools%\7z,"e -y #$q-o%WindowsDir%\System32#$q -r #$q%SourceDir%\sources\boot.wim#$q #$q%WimIndexBoot%\Windows\System32\wimgapi.dll#$q"

?
or my mount function:

@WIMMountImage := GetProcAddress(hWIMGAPI, 'WIMMountImage');

...

if not WIMMountImage(sourceDir, wimFile, imageIndex, toWideChar(tempDir)) then

...

can be done in a different and more efficient way?

Peter

[homes32]

For this solution to be used, it would need to be executed automatically from the project if it hadn't been applied before.

Or perhaps installed during the project build and then uninstalled when the project concludes.

everything is automatic.

[pscEx]

For this solution to be used, it would need to be executed automatically from the project if it hadn't been applied before.

Or perhaps installed during the project build and then uninstalled when the project concludes.

Same words homes32 used
Peter

[Wonko the Sane]

Just for record: IMO I already published a solution 18 month ago

...and someone even made a batch for it:
http://reboot.pro/9765/
specifying where to get the files from Windows 7 DVD/ISO, since I presume that in order to build a 7 PE one will need the actual 7 DVD/ISO, even if the "build PC" is not running 7.

I would call this a non-problem, thanks to pscEx's little app WimCaptEx.


Wonko

[Brito]

Same words homes32 used

Where?

[pscEx]

Where?

Just the post before mine.

Peter

[Brito]

It was difficult to understand what was intended to express..

Glad this is handled automatically.

[MedEvil]

This discussion and those calls for: "Back to less!" are just plain stupid.
Does anyone actually still remember the times of the Standard project?
It was as barebones as it get's and guess what, people weren't happy with it!
They complained, that there were no scripts included for x, y and z and it was too hard to find and download them. That they had to include their own drivers and and and.
So all those complaints were fixed over time and what now? Now people complain, that they got, what they asked for.

Just plain stupid.

Why should any developer actually care what anyone wants anymore? No matter what he does, it is wrong.

[larioteo]

That's not true App Scripts that a User don't need, why should they be includet? Is a little bit of searching for App Scripts to hard? Definitely no. Why a Project contains Opera or Software like that? Is it more important to be the best one and to include everything what is possible. A barebone Project is the Feature, easier to release Updates and Bugfixes, faster Developement,...

The App Scripts must only Add a App to the Build, it should be easier to download that scripts, with a seperate download section or so on. But the Build should be a basic build without everything.

In times where companies like Apple gaining more interest by the most of costumers, cause of simple to use Software for everyone, that is the Feature.

If the WinBuilder will be sometime a userfriendly Programm to build any PE, than it will gain more interesst all over the World, many people are still using BartPE, cause the WinBuilder Projects are blown with unaccessary Software, and other stuff.

You should open your mind for everyone, every User is important and not only they that like to Add everything is possible in a project.

[Sevilho]

The project is interesting. IMHO funny name. Clean from what? From viruses, advertising?

Why not more standard 'Base', 'Tiny' ?

[ChrisR]

The debate on more or less seems a bit sterile and not very positive .

Most users Win7PE want, indeed, something simple to start.
But a lot of users want quickly, after, more function and choices to customize their Building.
Some would like even more and more function and application.

Win7PE SE comes as a base with only a minimal of applications:
A browser "Opera", a search fiunction "Super Finder", utility for manipulating archives "7-zip".
The rest are some components that are selected or not.
Some directx, audio will be disabled by default in next update, my mistake.

But in fact, not easy to continue to develop it without making it too heavy.
It seems simple enough in WB to disable an unwanted component .

Then if we choose this mini, tiny,... Win7PE_SE, Al_jo quickly added, also MSI installer (post29) or some downloadable app script (post38).
We remain so in the same debate .
By cons, I do not like clean, it could mean that Win7PE_SE is not.


Everyone can choose, At last, it's my opinion.