Windows 10 clean install caused Repair Loop Error

All I can say Microsoft is missing the major problems, if MS release Windows 10 in July and do not fix the checking of the Sys reserve space and expand and shrink ntfs part if needed or the next build that comes along does not fix the "No-execute Memory Protect" issue then there is going to be major problems with home users across the board with rebooting issues just by upgrading.

I'm assuming Windows 10 will require CPU feature to be enabled for all on-going builds and final builds:
"No-execute Memory Protect", without this it will just reboot.

This was never the case for every other previous Windows build they brought out so I'm not sure why they are requiring it now.

Basically MS is forcing the feature, Yes it protects buffer overflow attacks. However alot of motherboard vendors have this optin switched off by default. How many home users out there i'm talking in a general every day use case know anything about bios's and there options. I'm not talking techno freaks either ha. If MS force this option it will frig alot of home users which will need to seek professional help if they decide to go ahead with Windows 10 upgrades.

atleeit said:

All I can say Microsoft is missing the major problems, if MS release Windows 10 in July and do not fix the checking of the Sys reserve space and expand and shrink ntfs part if needed or the next build that comes along does not fix the "No-execute Memory Protect" issue then there is going to be major problems with home users across the board with rebooting issues just by upgrading.

I'm assuming Windows 10 will require CPU feature to be enabled for all on-going builds and final builds:
"No-execute Memory Protect", without this it will just reboot.
.....

Lots of ifs and assumptions - and we're still running development code.

I understand what you're saying, but MS is working on this as I previously mentioned.

It's not clear that the two things you mentioned (size of the System Reserve part and No-execute Memory Protect) are connected, but I'll take your word on that. It's possible that a different bug presented itself as the one you saw.

I'm confident that MS will release Win10 without major issues ... there will be issues that are already being addressed for two releases next year. And many known issues will have updates earlier. That's how development works.

Here's some reading material:
Windows 10 FAQ & Tips - Microsoft
Windows 10 Specifications - Microsoft

To install a 64-bit OS on a 64-bit PC, your processor needs to support
CMPXCHG16b,
PrefetchW, and
LAHF/SAHF.

After skimming through the list, most of the CPU requirements seem to focus on 64 bit installs. I wonder if the issue you saw would present itself if you installed the 32-bit windows (I know.... you want a 64-bit install. It wasn't a suggestion, it was wondering)

Why are they requiring it now? To take advantage of the new features ... progress ... the future ... you know advancement

Slartybart I wasn't really connecting the two problems as they are totally two different problem areas, I was rather looking at them as two major pre-release problems.

I understand it's development code as I went through the same process testing the other previous windows as well with 7 and 8. I haven't tested 32bit install vs 64bit install on the same setup as normally I wouldn't as majority of pc's these days are 4gb+.

I also understand them wanting to add more features and advance in technology however the board I was using on one of my test setups was a G41 chipset, dual core 64bit processor which in many eyes still can handle Windows 10 however they only implemented the XD requirement in build 10030 and if they continue with this requirement then it's going to hurt quite alot of people if they do not know anything about bios's and how they work.

MS cannot expect normal users to know what a BIOS is, also they should not expect or want to force users to chuck there existing dual core setup away all because of this feature. What happens to the users with boards that do not have this feature? I'm assuming there wouldn't be a work around and there stuck with 7 or 8. Yes majority of all new boards or past boards dating back a few years would support this feature. I'm just more thinking about all those users with slightly older setups and are not techno savvy or the slightly older setups without this feature.

atleeit said:

Slartybart I wasn't really connecting the two problems as they are totally two different problem areas, I was rather looking at them as two major pre-release problems.

I understand it's development code as I went through the same process testing the other previous windows as well with 7 and 8. I haven't tested 32bit install vs 64bit install on the same setup as normally I wouldn't as majority of pc's these days are 4gb+.

I also understand them wanting to add more features and advance in technology however the board I was using on one of my test setups was a G41 chipset, dual core 64bit processor which in many eyes still can handle Windows 10 however they only implemented the XD requirement in build 10030 and if they continue with this requirement then it's going to hurt quite alot of people if they do not know anything about bios's and how they work.

MS cannot expect normal users to know what a BIOS is, also they should not expect or want to force users to chuck there existing dual core setup away all because of this feature. What happens to the users with boards that do not have this feature? I'm assuming there wouldn't be a work around and there stuck with 7 or 8. Yes majority of all new boards or past boards dating back a few years would support this feature. I'm just more thinking about all those users with slightly older setups and are not techno savvy or the slightly older setups without this feature.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

I think we agree with one exception ... older machines will have to be replaced. Let's see if the next release has the same requirement or causes the same issue.

If a machine does not meet the requirements, then you are correct. The user will just continue using Win7 or Win8 on that machine.

What happens if the user attempts to update one of those machines has to be crystal clear and fail gracefully. We'll see.

Bill
.

Hi Bill, I repair, build and install as a business on the side of my real full time job. I can see alot of my existing customers clicking the Windows logo, reserving there copy and installing without checking or being told about the specific hardware requirement. Windows 10 install does do a compatibility test but it won't check for a CPU feature if it's enabled or not. Good example would be 10030, we'll see what happens maybe I'm wrong or misjudging these problems and also mis-judging what improvements will happen over the next month.

atleeit said:

Hi Bill, I repair, build and install as a business on the side of my real full time job. I can see alot of my existing customers clicking the Windows logo, reserving there copy and installing without checking or being told about the specific hardware requirement. Windows 10 install does do a compatibility test but it won't check for a CPU feature if it's enabled or not. Good example would be 10030, we'll see what happens maybe I'm wrong or misjudging these problems and also mis-judging what improvements will happen over the next month.

Yeah, I got the sense that you weren't just an average end user. It's sometimes difficult to convey in a forum, but we're on the same page.

The only thing we can do is feed MS our experiences testing the Preview. I think there will be at least 3 more drops (one in June, two in July) - but that's just a guess. A few members installed the 135 leak and reported that it is very stable, so 136 should be on the FAST ring soon (rumors were for sometime last week).

atleeit : maybe I'm wrong or misjudging these problems
On the other hand, maybe you are right and have good judgement.

Keep the faith brother

Bill
.

Yeah Gabe did mention 136 is in OSG Slow ring on 11th June, let's hope he releases this and we see how it goes you never know a newer build might release above the internal 136 depending upon if the internal team is happy it won't break too much. :)

Maybe this will come out instead >>> 10147 :) anything newer and improved is always in my books for testing.