Announcing Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16179 PC + 15205 Mobile Insider

larc919 said:

Translation: Expect a new build on Friday. :)

I agree. And if this work pace in a regular way it will be a blessing.

johngalt said:

My reason for using Hyper-V actually goes back to the initial builds of WinX, and my tale of woe.

My mobo is an eVGA X58/ICH10R Classified 3 motherboard, which has some fantastic features, but which the eVGA team really screwed the pooch with when ti comes to the BIOS. When WinX first came out and I was testing TP2 hard on my machine as a dual boot, then running an Intel 180 GB SSD + an Intel 80 GB SSD, so all my VMs would have to go to one of my spacious mech HDDS, I found that I could not run Hyper-V. I would get all sorts of errors about Virt Tech not being enabled. But I build my own machines, and I know it is - and doubled checked in the BIOS to make sure.

It turns out there was a bug introduced in the BIOS somewhere around late 2009 or early 2010 that was never fixed - in that if you enable the VT setting in BIOS, it actually disabled it. And vice-versa. So, with it enabled in BIOS< Steve Gibson's little freeware utility securable shows vt (aka hardware virtualization) as being disabled. If I disable it in the BIOS, then securable shows it as enabled.

However, for whatever reason, earlier builds of WinX were also checking the BIOS for the setting (at least that is my theory) because when I had it turned off in the BIOS, and I enabled Hyper-V in Windows additional features, my machine broke - as in black screened and / or BSOD and refused to boot from that point on. But if I had it enabled in BIOS, then Hyper-V broke and would not run, claiming vt was disabled.

So, I gave up on VMs using Hyper-V for a long time.

Then I came back around here about a year ago and saw Kari doing what he was doing, and without any thoughts about it, I fired up Hyper-V in whatever current build I was running then and it just worked.

I was re-introduced to the foibles of this mobo recently when I tried to boot the RemixOS player to run Android within Windows - it gave me the same runaround, and it took me a couple of days to remember all of this from the past.

My machine is not a beast anymore - it is 7 generations behind in terms of CPU family, and only has 12 GB of RAM, so I run 1 VM at most on the system at any given time, but it has made software testing, for me, a lot easier, since I can have dedicated VMs for various software that I only fire up when needed for this or that test. All of these software tests, BTW, are being conducted on IP builds, with the exception of one, which I was hardcore testing last weekend on CU.

I have another desktop machine that I could take the time and put back together, using the old Intel SSDs for testing, and I have 2 laptops besides that I could test on - but it is a lot easier for me to test using one set of KB, mouse, and monitors rather than trying to move around and such, for me. Plus, having used Synergy, Multiplicity, and even Mouse without borders, I can say almost unequivocally, that there is no real substitute for a true hardware-based KVM.

So, that, plus the fact that I was like a kid in a candy store when I fired up Hyper-V and it just worked, have kept me stuck to using it.

My next build it going to be as modern of a build as I can get it to be (I have good storage, in 1 Sandisk 1TB SSD, 1 Crucial 240 GB SSD, 2 Seagate barracuda 1 TB mech HDDs and 1 Seagate 500 GB mech HDD, and my GTX 970 is more than sufficient for my gaming needs, so I can build up to a new machine on the cheap - only CPU, mobo, RAM and (optionally) case and PSU (I have a ThermalTake Tr2 BlackWidow 850W PSU, which should be fine for newer CPUs even with gobs of RAM thrown at them), but until then, this desktop is what I got - because the laptops are painfully slow (even with both having SATA II SSDs installed) at running Windows alone, forget anything else. And the old machine? Well, that is an nVidia 680 based mobo that uses a Core2Quad 6600 CPU (and this is what I expect Windows to look at my like if I were to try to run it as a daily driver on that machine: 0_o)

So, I have to agree with Kari to both counts: He did apologize for saying that the VM install was the only 100% reliable way to build an ISO, but he also never said hat VMs were the only platform for testing IP builds, and I agree with his outrage that someone suggested that VMs are, in fact, not a good platform for IP build testing.

My VMs take it to another level though - because I'm IP build testing on VMs whose host is also the current IP build lol.

Anyhoo, that's my soliloquy.

So, just to be funny, I tried it again.

BIOS = vt enabled, Hyper-V works, Securable says no vt available, and Intel's own Processor Identification utility also says no vt.

If I disable vt in BIOS, Hyper-V stops working (giving me the error that the hypervisor is not running), but Securable and Intel PIU both say vt is on.

I need to build a new computer.....I think 7 generations behind in terms of CPU is the longest I have gone thus far in my career for my personal machine....

John, have you ran the latest version of SecurAble? On an x64 or x86 version of Windows? SecurAble itself has a limitation (read bug) that it cannot fully examine the Processor's abilities from an x64 version of Windows:

On x64 Windows 7, I get this:



and when I "click for more", it says this:




Hardware Virtualization

GRC SecurAble additional text said:

This processor does offer advanced hardware support for virtualization. However, while running under a 64-bit version of Windows this program cannot execute its 32-bit kernel code to determine whether Intel's VMX virtual machine extensions are being locked on, locked off, or neither. Since there's a chance that your system's BIOS may be deliberately disabling support for hardware virtualization (some do) you should re-run this program, if possible, with administrative privileges under a 32-bit version of NT, XP, or Vista. That will allow SecurAble to run a bit of kernel-mode code in order to determine exactly what's going on. (Note that you can also poke around in your system's BIOS to see whether you're able to find any references to "hardware virtualization" or "VMX", etc.

Currently this processor's "hardware virtualization" is off and I am currently running an x64 version of Windows 7, and the Dell BIOS on this Latitude E6400 is Dell Proprietary. I shall save this and re-edit shortly in x86 Windows 10.

On Windows 10 x86 I get this:



So you cannot necessarily trust what this program reports.

Now having enabled Intel (R) VT and VT for Direct I/O and Trusted Execution, on the x86 Windows 10 in the BIOS, when I run SecurAble, I still get:

SecurAble said:

Virtualization Locked Off


This processor's advanced hardware support for virtualization has been disabled and "locked off" by some external influence - most likely by this system's BIOS as the system was booting. Since enabling hardware virtualization will allow faster and more secure virtual machines and their hosting operating systems to run at 100% full speed, you may wish to poke around in your system's BIOS to see whether you're able to find any references to "hardware virtualization" or "VMX", etc.

Finally on Windows 10 x86, with the same BIOS settings (all options for VT on) as immediately above, I get:



So I guess that you can't trust SecurAble in either x64 or x86 environments.

martyfelker said:

I agree. And if this work pace in a regular way it will be a blessing.

At this pace they will never get it released in September bug free.

Josey Wales said:

Attachment 131810

Pththththththth

Edwin said:

Unfortunately, for some reason, "Show most used apps" has to be on to show a cached Run Box jump list!

However, you'll also get the 'Most Used' list at the top of the Start Menu as well!

I have Show must used apps always disabled, yet I have normal jump list in Run showing all my previous entries.

Fafhrd said:

John, have you ran the latest version of SecurAble? On an x64 or x86 version of Windows? SecurAble itself has a limitation (read bug) that it cannot fully examine the Processor's abilities from an x64 version of Windows:

On x64 Windows 7, I get this:



and when I "click for more", it says this:




Hardware Virtualization

Currently this processor's "hardware virtualization" is off and I am currently running an x64 version of Windows 7, and the Dell BIOS on this Latitude E6400 is Dell Proprietary. I shall save this and re-edit shortly in x86 Windows 10.

On Windows 10 x86 I get this:



So you cannot necessarily trust what this program reports.

Now having enabled Intel (R) VT and VT for Direct I/O and Trusted Execution, on the x86 Windows 10 in the BIOS, when I run SecurAble, I still get:




Finally on Windows 10 x86, with the same BIOS settings (all options for VT on) as immediately above, I get:



So I guess that you can't trust SecurAble in either x64 or x86 environments.

Been using Gibson's tools for a very long time now. I know about Securable's limitations on X64 Windows.

Notice how your screenshots show how it is locked?

Here is mine:



Notice the difference? Furthermore, if you click on the No, you get this:



And Intel's PIU says something similar:



And yet, in a single screenshot, I can show you my running VM while both of those two utilities say I have no Virtualization technology available to me:



Now, for Ss&Gs, I can power off my computer, disable vt in my BIOS, and then show you quite the opposite: Securable and Intel PIU will say i DO have VT but Hyper-V will tell me it cannot run because the hypervisor is not running.

I trust that you'll believe me when I say that this is not an issue with Securable nor Intel's Utility, but my mobo, and more specifically, the BIOS on my mobo - and that it is not anything new, since the last BIOS release for this mobo was 2011....

Josey Wales said:

At this pace they will never get it released in September bug free.

We had plenty of times before where we went for a week or two without a release....

Besides, who are you trying to fool? This is, after all, Micro$oft - name a single product that they released that was bug-free:

Edwin said:

Unfortunately, for some reason, "Show most used apps" has to be on to show a cached Run Box jump list!



However, you'll also get the 'Most Used' list at the top of the Start Menu as well!

Nope - I've always had that turned off, and I've had jump lists before.

Kari said:

I have Show must used apps always disabled, yet I have normal jump list in Run showing all my previous entries.

^^^^^^^^ This

johngalt said:

Besides, who are you trying to fool? This is, after all, Micro$oft - name a single product that they released that was bug-free:

This comment is silly on two levels:

1) All OSs have bugs

2) There is no such company as Micro$oft or App£e or And₹;oid. It is so tedious when people do this as if they expect major corporations to be charities and do things for free.