Windows 10: UUP to ISO - Create Bootable ISO from Windows 10 Build Upgrade Files  


  1. Posts : 17
    Windows 10 Pro 64bit
       22 Dec 2017 #980

    cereberus said: View Post
    Firstly, it does not matter in the slightest if an install is uefi or legacy bios when it comes to installing any version of Windows 10.

    You have absolutely nothing to back up your theory.

    Secondly, UEFI installs offer several advantages so you should consider moving to it.

    Thirdly, the Fast Ring is not for users who do not wish to, or are unable to cope with significant risk of things breaking. Given your comments above, I have to say you need to seriously think about whether the Fast Ring is for you.

    Finally Acronis 2009 is so old. You really cannot trust it any more. It certainly will not work on UEFI installs if you did move. Ditch it and move to Macrium Reflect Free or similar, or buy new version of Acronis.
    Please, read my post again. I've been on the fast ring since Jan 2015 so I think I can handle it just fine. I'm not afraid of any risks or breaks, all my stuff is backed up. My theory is based on the facts mentioned above and my copy of Acronis works just fine for my needs.

    Thanks for the advice and no need for you to reply anymore. Bye.
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  2.    22 Dec 2017 #981

    EQuito said: View Post
    Please, read my post again. I've been on the fast ring since Jan 2015 so I think I can handle it just fine. I'm not afraid of any risks or breaks, all my stuff is backed up. My theory is based on the facts mentioned above and my copy of Acronis works just fine for my needs.

    Thanks for the advice and no need for you to reply anymore. Bye.
    You made a theory which was not based on any evidence. Bye.
      My ComputerSystem Spec


  3. Posts : 17
    Windows 10 Pro 64bit
       22 Dec 2017 #982

    cereberus said: View Post
    You made a theory which was not based on any evidence. Bye.
    The evidence might not be obvious to you, but pretty obvious to me.
    Like I said, first time EVER that ANY build failed to install on both of my machines, specially the old 32bit one.
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  4.    22 Dec 2017 #983

    EQuito said: View Post
    The evidence might not be obvious to you, but pretty obvious to me.
    Like I said, first time EVER that ANY build failed to install on both of my machines, specially the old 32bit one.
    Complete nonsense. It is simply this is a major build upgrade and crap happens. Not worth discussing any more!
      My ComputerSystem Spec


  5. Posts : 17
    Windows 10 Pro 64bit
       22 Dec 2017 #984

    cereberus said: View Post
    Complete nonsense. It is simply this is a major build upgrade and crap happens. Not worth discussing any more!
    Really? FYI, these mass failures started with Build 17025, check the hub or any other forum for that matter and BTW, most of the failures reported with error code 0xc1900101 are older hardware related.
      My ComputerSystem Spec


  6. Posts : 1,921
    Windows 10 Pro IP Build 16299.192 (Branch: RS3 Release)
       22 Dec 2017 #985

    EQuito said: View Post
    Really? FYI, these mass failures started with Build 17025, check the hub or any other forum for that matter and BTW, most of the failures reported with error code 0xc1900101 are older hardware related.
    You are absolutely correct! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
      My ComputersSystem Spec


  7. Posts : 17
    Windows 10 Pro 64bit
       22 Dec 2017 #986

    slicendice said: View Post
    You are absolutely correct! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
    Thanks! same to you. Cheers!
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  8.    22 Dec 2017 #987

    EQuito said: View Post
    Really? FYI, these mass failures started with Build 17025, check the hub or any other forum for that matter and BTW, most of the failures reported with error code 0xc1900101 are older hardware related.
    "Build 17046 is the first one ever (since January 2015) to failed in both my 32bit and 64bit machines, therefore I think Microsoft is purposely blocking and/or phasing out old hardware not using UEFI bios and/or GPT mode. That would explain the huge amount of failed installs reported since Build 17025."
    This is complete nonsense. Old builds may be an issue but whether UEFI or legacy bios has NOTHING to do with it. There is no deliberate policy here but one cannot really expect MS to pay attention to making sure Insiders works on old devices ad nauseam!

    If MS was deliberately doing this on old devices, they would simply give an error saying hardware is not compatible.

    My FINAL WORD on the subject!
      My ComputerSystem Spec

  9.    22 Dec 2017 #988

    cereberus said: View Post
    "Build 17046 is the first one ever (since January 2015) to failed in both my 32bit and 64bit machines, therefore I think Microsoft is purposely blocking and/or phasing out old hardware not using UEFI bios and/or GPT mode. That would explain the huge amount of failed installs reported since Build 17025."
    This is complete nonsense. Old builds may be an issue but whether UEFI or legacy bios has NOTHING to do with it. There is no deliberate policy here but one cannot really expect MS to pay attention to making sure Insiders works on old devices ad nauseam!

    If MS was deliberately doing this on old devices, they would simply give an error saying hardware is not compatible.

    My FINAL WORD on the subject!
    Exactly, working fine on all kinds of old or new HW, 775 Intel, Phenom II and FX 6350 just some I updated successfully, yet there are some otherwise normal machines having troubles.
      My ComputersSystem Spec


  10. Posts : 1,270
    WinX Pro x64 IP current
       22 Dec 2017 #989

    EQuito said: View Post
    First of all, thank you all for your prompt responses and willingness to help.

    Secondly, I'd like to summarize all my replies here so I don't take too much space on this thread.

    But first, a bit of background so you understand where I'm coming from:

    I'm 58 years old, so if you're also old and geeky enough, you may remember me from the Icrontic Forums or APU's days when my Abit NF7s bios mods were pretty popular during the infancy days of OC'ing.
    Anyway, I left the US, move back to my native country in 2005 and basically my knowledge and hardware didn't progress since until last year, when I bough my first 64bit machine, the one in my signature. My old trusty Dell Inspiron 9300 laptop served his purpose and still does, thus why I still use an old copy of Acronis 2009 32bit which also works just fine for my needs. So, all this UEFI and GPT stuff is pretty new to me and a bit hard to understand so I prefer to keep using the Lenovo 64bit in legacy bios and MBR mode.

    OK, back to the issue at hand: HippsieGypsie's and johngalt's advise where very helpful resolving the partition issue but in the end it didn't work. After the first reboot, I got a GSOD, tried again and got a never ending black screen.

    My theory as what's going on:

    Build 17046 is the first one ever (since January 2015) to failed in both my 32bit and 64bit machines, therefore I think Microsoft is purposely blocking and/or phasing out old hardware not using UEFI bios and/or GPT mode. That would explain the huge amount of failed installs reported since Build 17025.

    So, even though I prefer clean installs, I'll just continue to update from within Windows and try not to worry about it too much.

    Once again, thanks for your help. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you all!

    Cheers!
    EQuito,

    I am running 2 machines. One is a bit newer, a Dell Inspiron 15 machine with UEFI that originally came with Windows 8, and was manufactured sometime in 2014.

    The other machine (a desktop) I have is a home built machine, with a Core is 965 EE CPU and an eVGA X58 Classified 3 motherboard with 12 GB of DDR3 RAM. In my profile, the old desktop is listed as my primary machine, with full specs, and the laptop is listed as the second machine.

    The desktop has ONLY BIOS, no UEFI at all. The boot drive can only be MBR in that situation, even though the CPU and the OS are both 64-bit. And yet I have had no real trouble installing the 17xxx build on this desktop, repeatedly. I have had the same problems a lot of people are having inside the build, particularly 17046 (and some minor issues even in 17063), but no major install issues.

    So, that kinda kills your theory.

    In addition, kind of supporting your theory, but now really, if you read the entire thread, is this thread where we are working to get Bordi onto a 17xxx build, which his machine refuses to - Win 10 RS-4 not compatible with Intel DX58SO motherboard - Windows 10 Forums

    Now, if you read that thread, though he is using a different motherboard, an Intel, it has the same main chipsets on it as mine, namely the X58, the ICH10R, and even another controller chipset made by Marvell. He had been trying everything but upgrades from 16299, aka FCU, continue to fail for him. His theory is similar to yours, but it is even more poignant in that his motherboard hardware is so similar to mine, whereas mine works and his does not.

    I can understand why you would think that your recent experiences would lead you to believe you have the answer, but my machine stands in the way of supporting both your and his theories as to why this is occurring. My CPU is almost 9 years old, my motherboard is 7, and it has no UEFI onboard anywhere - it is strictly BIOS based, as I mentioned above. And it is still running 17xxx builds, so that, in and of itself, is counterintuitive to your supposition.

    I hope my logic-based response is not antagonistic, as I am not trying to antagonize you at all, merely stating facts. However, in point of fact, your supposition is incorrect, because of it were true, me and MANY other users would also have these problems that you do.

    One thing to consider, though - it could be Acronis itself that is causing you installation problems with this build, something to consider.

    My sister, finishing her Ph. D. in Pharmaceutical Science, was in Hawai'i for 6 years, and I had to remote support her machine from mainland US. She, too, had an older version of Acronis that she used religiously to make full backups of her system nightly and weekly (the scheme was actually differential for the week and full for the weekend, but not really important here). I believe it was Acronis 2013, not sure, though,my might have been a slightly older, back to 2011. But while working on her Ph. D. she had to use a lot of legacy hardware in the labs, so she remained on Windows 7.

    Last year, as she began the final stages of defending her dissertation, once she was done with her lab work, she decided to upgrade to Windows 10 - and Acronis immediately started having massive issues - backups not run, error messages about drives not found when they were connected, etc. They got so bad that 1 year ago, about 4 months after her Windows upgrade, I spent the better part of 5 days working on her machine and researching other options for her, and migrated her to Macrium free.

    I had bought her that license of Acronis, a family pack, no less, so it feels like I am taking a hit in my wallet. But in reality, it is Acronis who is taking the hit because I will never again recommend their product for use because of the absolute lackluster responses from them, which always amount to ”But this problem doesn't exist in any of our newer products!”

    Macrium free works perfectly, using all of the same type of options and with a very similar setup as I had her running in Acronis - and now she has 0 errors and is happily working on her final revisions.

    So, the choice is yours, but I will leave you with this final thought:

    Your version of Acronis was developed around the same time as my CPU was made. 9 years is a long, long time in terms of software development. If you really want to continue using Acronis 2009, you should really consider not using anymore Insider Preview builds, after all, I am almost positive that Acronis offers 0 support for Windows 10 in that 2009 version.

    Even if it does everything you want exactly how you want, your OS has grown by leaps and bounds, and you should consider replacing legacy software with current, nature software that is designed to work with modern OSs.

    At any rate,, good luck with your issues, if you want to start another thread like Bordi did to try to work through this, I will offer whatever assistance I can there as well.

    Good luck.
      My ComputersSystem Spec


 

Related Threads
As Microsoft has changed the upgrade method from ESD based upgrade to a UUP based, the method told in this tutorial does not work anymore with 15xxx and later builds. Please see UUP to ISO tutorial for a working method: UUP to ISO - Create...
I've asked about this a long time ago. Several personal issue interfered with me getting computer work done. Now I'm starting a telecommuting job in a week, need to clean things up a bit. Just in case I have issues, I'd like to burn off a bootable...
Had tried to update the BIOS on my son's Alienware Aurora R4 so that we could install an upgraded graphics card (980 Ti). Used the Dell Support site - and was upgrading from Bios 7 to Bios 9 - would eventually go up to current version 11 before...
Tried looking this up online, but couldn't find any specific information. I'm running on Windows 10 Home, and I have a Windows 10 ISO I want to put in a flash drive so it's bootable. How do I do this?
Here's an alternative in addition to Kari's Tutorial: ESD to ISO - Create Bootable ISO from Windows 10 ESD File - Windows 10 Forums https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ8SCzhbycA NOTE: It is better to create an ISO contaning install.wim so if you...
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 10 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 10" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 20:09.
Find Us