When using the media creation tool and when you get to the part where you can choose 'create USB stick' or 'ISO file> (Rufus not shown)', is it the same either way or is one better than the other?
I used the ISO file and then Rufus to create the bootable stick to install Win 10 Pro but wondered if the other way is the same, better or worse.
Hello Peter,
Sure, you can use either method to create a bootable Windows 10 installation USB. They are just different ways to do the same.
Create Bootable USB Flash Drive to Install Windows 10 | Windows 10 Tutorials
Whatever works for you is OK.
Rufus has too many options, if you're not careful it's possible to make a usb that won't boot. The MCT will at least make a standard bootable usb.
Personally I download the ISO then use Diskpart to prepare the usb (clean, create partition, format to Fat32 and mark Active). Then just mount the ISO and copy everything to the usb. This makes a usb identical to the one the MCT would make.
I prefer the a Bootable USB Drive. I set aside an 8GB SanDisk just for that purpose. CDs/DVDs are slowly making their way out. I still have Blu-Ray DVD Drives in both of my computers, but I rarely use them anymore.
So do I, but an ISO has certain advantages. If you want to upgrade a machine you can mount the ISO as a virtual drive and run Setup from there - faster than upgrading from a usb.
Also, if you use the MCT to make the USB you have to run it again if you want to make a second one, you can make as many USBs as you want from the one ISO.
Thank you all for the clarification and explanations, particularly the demos.
I asked b/c someone told me not to use the USB selection and I had wondered why.
Restricts you to making just one usb and will fail if the usb has a gpt partition (a possibility if you have ever used Rufus on it).
USB flash drive --assign drive letter back to dynamic from static - post #30Bree said:
@Bree: I mostly agree with your general assessment of Rufus, but will note -- based on recent, hands-on experience -- that Rufus 3.0 is a great improvement over previous versions. It's easier to use, less subject to "strange behavior" (especially, resetting the file system from FAT32 to NTFS after entering a volume label, as it used to do), and more streamlined and straightforward now.
HTH,
--Ed--
My 2 cents? I get both and choose the 3rd that gets me both the 32-bit [x86] and 64-bit [x64], have to use an 8GB or 16GB USB Thumb drive and the .iso file requires a DVD+R/DL [Dual Layer] disc. Then I can use the results on either type computer I encounter, lessens the number of 'tools' I need to have with me on house calls. I also save the Offline update files on the 16GB USB drive.
Quote
