Recommended Posts

On 19/05/2022 at 23:35, PGHammer said:

Installed 25120 earlier today - like 25115, it runs on my G3258 just fine.  Only Windows Subsystem  for Android is missing.

I thought that was a store app? You might have to install it (I haven't checked) and it also might require prerequisites like virtualization. 

  • 2 weeks later...

Windows Store for Android has two prerequisites that i lack (both of which are known) more than two CPU core and a SSD).  Hence it being a quibble currently - I am prepping to do a birthday upgrade that will fix both - Core i5 and a 1 TB SSD.  The G3258 supports virtualization, so that is NOT it.

  • 2 weeks later...
On 05/06/2022 at 22:27, PGHammer said:

FOLLOWUP: Replaced 25120 with 25131 and installed the Subsystem for Android manually -  this week I will add the Play Store patch.

I am interested to know how well apps fare on your system. When I tried it (when it first became available for Insiders last year) in a 8GB RAM VM it crawled and was unusable.

 

I use Bluestacks in Windows 10 21H2 19044.1708 and I can run two instances of it fine on my i9-9990K 32GB (G.Skill Ripjaws 3200MHz) system, but even with this setup I can't run a VMware VM as well, I get an out of memory error, so I am looking at getting some more RAM and going to 64GB. I want to be able to run two VMs at the same time without issue too so I don;t have to shut one down to update another.

  • 8 months later...

Windows 11 Insider build 29300 (current Dev  AMD64) is a fantastic starting Windows 10 or later point for any one wanting to kickstart Windows 11 testing.  The current DEV image is a triple track(Pro, Home, Enterprise) image, that can  be clean-installed or upgrade installed.

  • 2 months later...

I am running the current Canary Home build - because it shipped in ISO form, I simply mounted and did a pour-over.  The Intel Command Center supports all processors with built-in GPUs down to Celeron Solo - including Pentium Solo and Dual/G.  It is now standard fare for all on-CPU graphics cores up to i5.

On 20/02/2023 at 22:20, PGHammer said:

Windows 11 Insider build 29300 (current Dev  AMD64) is a fantastic starting Windows 10 or later point for any one wanting to kickstart Windows 11 testing.  The current DEV image is a triple track(Pro, Home, Enterprise) image, that can  be clean-installed or upgrade installed.

Erm, am i missing something here? Maybe a typo?? ;) 29300? Maybe you meant 25300? 

Made me read that a couple of times, as i am on 25357... :) 

  • 2 months later...

As far as Intel on-CPU drivers, support for older Pentium G CPUs - despite that being based on the i3 - is gone as of 23905 - is the same true in the case of the i3? (The Intel GPU driver was the 4400 Intel driver, and was used by Celeron -G, PenitiumG, Atom, and i3 due to the same graphics core.)

On 20/07/2023 at 12:13, PGHammer said:

As far as Intel on-CPU drivers, support for older Pentium G CPUs - despite that being based on the i3 - is gone as of 23905 - is the same true in the case of the i3? (The Intel GPU driver was the 4400 Intel driver, and was used by Celeron -G, PenitiumG, Atom, and i3 due to the same graphics core.)

Hello,

Does not seem to be mentioned in the announcement/changelog at https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2023/07/12/announcing-windows-11-insider-preview-build-25905/.  Were these old CPUs (and their IGPs) officially supported at one point

The system requirements for Windows 11 at https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/whats-new/windows-11-requirements contain this, though:

  • Graphics card: Compatible with DirectX 12 or later, with a WDDM 2.0 driver.

I believe the Intel HD Graphics 4400 IGP is a DirectX 11.1 part, so I am kind of unsure of whether it was officially supported.  My impression was that the Intel UHD Graphics 600-series  was the floor for support, at least from looking over the CPUs listed at https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/minimum/supported/windows-11-supported-intel-processors.

Were you running these beta builds of Windows on unsupported hardware?  If so, that could be the reason this latest build is no longer installing.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky
 

  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

I have added two newer laptops to the testing pool = one Core i5 (Toshiba Satellite P945) and one Core i7 (Dell Inspiron 7786).  Both are touchscreen and both got a complete replacement of the Windows 7 that came on them  The Inspiron also supports the Windows Subsystem for Android and is - by far - the faster of the two.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!