Honored members of the community,
The question in the title is what I'm currently pondering. I don't really have the money for this at the moment but I would like to have a conversation about it to determine if I even should once I'm able to.
My use case:
I am a bit of a tinkerer with regards to my personal system. I do like to customize the look and functionality of my operating system while keeping it slimmed down and not bogged down with features I never use, but I'd rather it not be an ongoing project with constant problem solving. Off the top of my head, I'm not able to come up with any of the new Windows features that I actually use and wouldn't be able to find a suitable substitute for. The only app I know that I need is Windows Store as some games depends on it being installed. For anything else I've always resorted to third party applications and won't mind continuing to do so. That includes: Security, backup/restore and so on.
Currently I've managed to uninstall/disable most of the features I don't use post-installation and I'm not sure what I would gain by not having those features/components being installed in the first place instead, other than satisfying my OCD with the knowledge that they were never there to begin with.
Lastly, I'm not one to use Windows Update for anything other than security updates. If I need the latest feature update for some reason, I'd much rather do a complete reinstall. Downloading the latest ISO and applying a NTLite configuration file to that is one of the upsides I can think of.
Other use cases:
I sometime fix up (as in install and configure) Windows systems for acquaintances. These people are not power users in any sense of the word really. The OS features introduced in W10/W11 are stuff whose existence they're probably not even aware of, have no need for, or are interested in using. They need a stable system that doesn't get in their way while they're browsing the internet, reading their e-mails or working with Adobe/Office products. That's mostly it even if there sometimes are rare exceptions to the above-mentioned.
Having a pre-configured, slimmed down, ISO to deploy in these cases is something I figure would save me a lot of time and boring, repetitive work. The main question here is how having Windows Update enabled might interfere with removed system components, apps, and other custom system settings.
Some direct questions:
Does Windows Update tend to break stuff or reinstall components that have been removed, or change certain system settings? I'm speaking generally here as I understand dependencies do change from time to time.
Is the risk of removing components that seem irrelevant now but later turn out to be necessary for third-party applications to install or function properly a very big concern?
Hopefully I managed to get my point across without making this too difficult to read. All questions, opinions, unrelated politic rants, are more than welcome. Thank you kindly for your attention!
The question in the title is what I'm currently pondering. I don't really have the money for this at the moment but I would like to have a conversation about it to determine if I even should once I'm able to.
My use case:
I am a bit of a tinkerer with regards to my personal system. I do like to customize the look and functionality of my operating system while keeping it slimmed down and not bogged down with features I never use, but I'd rather it not be an ongoing project with constant problem solving. Off the top of my head, I'm not able to come up with any of the new Windows features that I actually use and wouldn't be able to find a suitable substitute for. The only app I know that I need is Windows Store as some games depends on it being installed. For anything else I've always resorted to third party applications and won't mind continuing to do so. That includes: Security, backup/restore and so on.
Currently I've managed to uninstall/disable most of the features I don't use post-installation and I'm not sure what I would gain by not having those features/components being installed in the first place instead, other than satisfying my OCD with the knowledge that they were never there to begin with.
Lastly, I'm not one to use Windows Update for anything other than security updates. If I need the latest feature update for some reason, I'd much rather do a complete reinstall. Downloading the latest ISO and applying a NTLite configuration file to that is one of the upsides I can think of.
Other use cases:
I sometime fix up (as in install and configure) Windows systems for acquaintances. These people are not power users in any sense of the word really. The OS features introduced in W10/W11 are stuff whose existence they're probably not even aware of, have no need for, or are interested in using. They need a stable system that doesn't get in their way while they're browsing the internet, reading their e-mails or working with Adobe/Office products. That's mostly it even if there sometimes are rare exceptions to the above-mentioned.
Having a pre-configured, slimmed down, ISO to deploy in these cases is something I figure would save me a lot of time and boring, repetitive work. The main question here is how having Windows Update enabled might interfere with removed system components, apps, and other custom system settings.
Some direct questions:
Does Windows Update tend to break stuff or reinstall components that have been removed, or change certain system settings? I'm speaking generally here as I understand dependencies do change from time to time.
Is the risk of removing components that seem irrelevant now but later turn out to be necessary for third-party applications to install or function properly a very big concern?
Hopefully I managed to get my point across without making this too difficult to read. All questions, opinions, unrelated politic rants, are more than welcome. Thank you kindly for your attention!