Talk:Windows 10 editions

Enterprise?
If this is true,

Microsoft has announced that upgrades made through July 29, 2016 will be free. This does not include upgrades for Windows Enterprise editions.[2]

Then why is Windows 7 Enterprise listed under Windows 10 Enterprise in that checkered table? --86.27.232.103 (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 Enterprise systems can be upgraded to Windows 10 Enterprise. However, that upgrade is not "free" and is only available through the volume licensing deals that enterprises have with Microsoft. So while not "free," the upgrade is still possible, as it was from 7 to 8 or 8.1 heat_fan1 (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Multi-monitor Remote Desktop?
One of the only reasons I ever acquired Win 7 Ultimate editions was in order to be able to use multiple monitors with Remote Desktop.

Does anyone know and/or would it be useful to include information about whether/which editions of Win 10 support multi-monitor Remote Desktop? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stokely (talk • contribs) 13:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Ugh, I'm horrible at editing...sorry this got inserted in the middle instead of at the bottom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stokely (talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikitable
Originally on the Microsoft Windows 10 article the below wikitable was removed without any justification, while this article uses a completely different wikitable, personally I find the one below easier to read and would think that it would be more objective as it includes a more organised upgrade path and shows which versions and ineligible.

As the user hasn't given a reason for its removal I will ask if this model is better before inserting it and getting reverted. Sincerely, --86.81.201.94 (talk) 07:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Looks like someone made the change for you. heat_fan1 (talk) 15:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Incorporate in Wikipedia main Windows 10 article
Suggest that the data in this article be incorporated in main Windows 10 article. At the moment the sections on 'editions' are not consistent. CPES (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Remove Mobile and Mobile Enterprise
It has already been confirmed that these aren't Windows 10 editions, Wikipedia needs to be more consistent. Sincerely, --86.81.201.94 (talk) 20:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree. Not only that, but "Windows 10 Mobile" is just Windows Mobile with a 10 in the middle. It's simply a crappy marketing move by Microsoft. This is Wikipedia, not a Microsoft fan website. I support the removal of "Mobile" and "Mobile Enterprise". Billybobjoe321 (talk) 04:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Locke411's edit - Upgrading from Enterprise to Enterprise
Locke411, your change does not include a reliable source. Your edits here and here (and now here, as you've reverted your changes yet again) - is not supported by a reliable source. If your change is correct and performing an in-place upgrade from the same Operating System to the exact same Operating System is not possible, then you need to provide a source that says that it isn't possible. Can you please discuss your concerns here instead of reverting? In the meantime, I am restoring the page back to its original state, as sources state that you can do this (it is essentially a system repair when you do so). See this source, as it is one of many sites that state that you can do this.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:20, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * The burden of the source is on the person who inserts or re-instates "yes" or "no". In this case, you. But "N/A" means "no answer" and is a form of abstaining from response.
 * And let's face it: Installing the same edition of Windows over an existing installation is not an upgrade.
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 22:26, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Codename Lisa! I appreciate your fair argument and your analysis on this situation. I will agree and accept "N/A" as the answer. Thank you :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:21, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad to be helpful . —Codename Lisa (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Low-cost version
Please correct and improve my edit. Is it low-cost or free? Is it known what the maximum specs are? PizzaMan (♨♨) 11:41, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Windows 7 Ultimate and Windows 10 Pro are non-homogeneous
Hi.

I recently reverted the following contribution in the article: "Windows 7 Ultimate's upgrade to Windows 10 Pro, is a functional downgrade, (W7U == W7 Enterprise, licenced for individual's use)." Apart from the fact that it is original research, it is wrong; i.e. upgrading Windows 7 Ultimate to Windows 10 Pro is not a functional downgrade. Windows 7 Ultimate had two set of extra features over Windows 7 Professional.

Here is feature set 1: Although these features were available to owners of the Ultimate edition, only enterprises with appropriate software, licenses and a Windows Domain could use them. These features are not available in Windows 10 Pro.
 * Enterprise search scopes
 * Federated search
 * BranchCache Distributed Cache
 * DirectAccess
 * Virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) enhancements
 * Virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) licensed

Here is feature set 2: These features can be used by the individuals at home. They are all available in Windows 10 Pro except SUA, which is deprecated in favor of Windows Subsystem for Linux. (Yes, Windows 10 Pro supports BitLocker too.)
 * Windows Media Player multimedia redirection
 * Audio recording over Remote Desktop Connection
 * Multi-display Remote Desktop Connection
 * BitLocker
 * Subsystem for Unix-based Applications (SUA)
 * Supports Multilingual User Interface packages
 * VHD booting
 * Switching between any of the 37 available languages

So, as you can see, upgrading from Windows 7 Ultimate to Windows 10 Pro is not a functional downgrade.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Device-independent security updates
Hey. An IP editor has twice so far tried to add a "device-independent security updates" to the table, once without a source and once with a fake source. It is reverted once by and once by your truly. If anyone has a source for this, please come forward.  Fleet  Command ( Speak your mind! ) 07:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Why is "Hardware device encryption" listed as a feature?
What exactly is meant by this? There are many devices with hardware encryption around and they usually work independent from the OS. Thanks! 200.102.88.60 (talk)
 * Hi.
 * This one doesn't speak about all those "many devices with hardware encryption" that "work independent from the OS".
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 09:19, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Most stripped down edition of Windows 10 available
Re "Windows 10 Enterprise Long Term Servicing Branch (LTSB) ... is the most stripped down edition of Windows 10 available", I believe that Windows 10 Enterprise N LTSB is the most stripped down edition of Windows 10 available. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Is the Remote Desktop feature in Home really 'client only'?
I don't use Windows 10 so I can't verify or edit this myself, but in the comparison chart of Windows 10 editions, I would have expected the Remote Desktop feature in the Home edition of Windows 10 to be "host only", not "client only" - ie. someone can connect to you, but you can't connect to other people. That's how it's been with every other version of Windows that includes these features. --TheSophera (talk) 13:50, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi.
 * The exact opposite of what you said is correct, i.e. you can connect to RD servers but you have no RD server for anyone to connect to.
 * So, "client only" is correct.
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 18:01, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Update to newer builds
Hi.

Can this be proven by sources?

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

N and K and KN, oh my!
I am trying to pull together a list of exactly what gets removed for N and KN editions. Here is my rough draft, mostly original research (random blogs, Korean and German sites using Google translate) WARNING: SOME OF THE FOLLOWING MAY BE INCORRECT.

"Due to a ruling for anti-competitive practices by the European Commission in 2004, Windows N editions have Media Player, Groove Music, Video Player, Voice Recorder, digital rights management, Windows Camera and Skype removed and are missing Audio and Video codecs (MPEG, WMA, AAC, FLAC, ALAC, AMR, Dolby Digital, VC-1, MPEG-4, H.264, H.265 and H.263)."

"Due to a ruling and fine by the Korea Trade Fair Commission in 2005, Windows KN editions have Media Player and Messenger removed and come pre-installed with links to competing instant messaging and media player software. KN Editions only support Korean and English."

(I think the K edition was XP only, but am not sure)

What I need to do to turn the above into something we can use are some reliable sources that detail exactly what was and was not removed so I can fact-check the above, add citations, and possibly add it to the article. Can anyone find sources on this? --Guy Macon (talk) 14:28, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

POV issue: Main editions
Hello

Today, made a host of good edits (resulting in ), but I disagree with one of them. (As such I expressed by disagreement through BRD; I reverted to a last known good version, then restored all edits with which I had no problem.)

The problem is categorization of editions into "Main" and non-main variants. What is more questionable is that the editions designated as "Main" are actually the consumer editions: Home and Pro! Microsoft is a company whose motto should be: "Dear consumers, we couldn't care less about you." Its majority of income comes from the Enterprise sector and has not added a major consumers-only feature to Windows since Windows XP. How on earth these two editions are "Main"!?

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 06:15, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Baseline is vague, but I don't have a better word. I made a few edits because we can't say that the baseline editions are only sold via retail. For example, you could Windows 10 Pro from the Windows Store, and the online store, not just the retail Microsoft store.  WikIan - ( talk )  06:48, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Also . we can't say "new" devices because what constitutes a "new" device? What if the device is refurbished?  WikIan - ( talk )  06:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I meant "new" as in new to the owner, bought from a store. And I meant retail as in retail channels. Surely online retail counts? ViperSnake151   Talk  06:57, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Windows 10 S "device-specific"
Right now Windows 10 S is listed as "device-specific", but isn't tied to any particular device type. It ships with the high-end Surface Laptop as well as entry-level devices, and is available to any school computers already on Windows Pro. It seems it should probably fall under the same category as Windows 10 Education. - Josh (talk | contribs) 22:18, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi. That's true. As a matter of fact, we still don't know how the S edition is going to be licensed. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 05:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It is tied to specific devices . There is no mention that this will be sold as a stand alone product, but is is definitely preloaded on devices such as Surface Laptop.  WikIan  - ( talk )  13:47, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Headings
I reverted the headings changes that were made by Codename Lisa in edit 778958396, because 1. the order makes more sense, it flows logically from consumer to enterprise and then to the enterprise servicing branches (I'm not sure this should be in this article anyhow because half of the listed editions can't switch to CB, CBB, or LTSB). Additionally, calling them organizational editions is incorrect as Pro is licensed to small and mid-sized businesses therefore saying that the listed enterprise editions are the only ones for all organizations is wrong.

Secondly, we should not have to clarify what an appliance is WP:MOS "Avoid ambiguity, jargon, and vague or unnecessarily complex wording". Device-specific means exactly what it is, they are preloaded on specific devices. Just as Mobile is not one device, S can also be on multiple devices. Only IoT really runs on Home_appliances and in any case PCs can be considered appliances too.  WikIan - ( talk )  04:25, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Service branches
Does this belong in the edition article? I mean first of all, with delta updates Windows 10 is not being offered as a full image each time it upgrades. I'm reading through current branch and I am looking for any articles that say Windows 10 Home/Pro is part of current branch (CB).  WikIan - ( talk )  04:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it does not belong in this article. It is not about editions after all. But the thing about "delta updates"? You got it all wrong. "Delta updates" is just a technique for reducing update sizes. That's all.  Fleet  Command ( Speak your mind! ) 07:08, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Why was the old reference from the W10 Chin government edition removed?
I don't see how On MSFT is an unreliable source, even if the wording was wrong On MSFT is as reliable as Engadget. Donald Trung (talk) 00:00, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh! Looks like someone has feelings towards a certain source. I wonder why.
 * Sources are not always changed because they are bad. Sometimes, good sources are changed for the better, e.g., newer ones with more up-to-date info.  Fleet  Command ( Speak your mind! ) 13:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Windows Defender Application Guard
Hello!

Recently, one of our editors, has added the following to the article: "After Fall Creators Update, Windows Defender Application Guard is introduced into Windows 10 Enterprise but not included in Windows 10 Education." But the source given does not say this. It says nothing about the Education edition. It does not even say "only Enterprise edition". Actually, it looks like an article about the Enteprise edition that is simply not interest in the Education edition. I believe Shujenchang's novel interpretation is wrong and this sentence must be removed.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:16, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * According to this screenshot taken from a computer with Windows 10 Education version 1709 installed, Windows Defender Application Guard is unable to be ticked in "Turn Windows features on or off" with a message "Windows Defender Application Guard is only supported by Windows 10, Enterprise Edition".--Shujen Chang (talk) 11:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi.
 * That's very suspicious. Why would a checkbox be included in the first place?
 * Also, we don't know who posted this image.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, Windows Defender Advanced Threat Protection is a function included in both Enterprise and Education, so that in its documentation page, both Enterprise and Education are listed under "Applies to:". However, in the documentation page of Windows Defender Application Guard, only Enterprise is listed under "Applies to:", if WDAG is supported by Education as well, then Education should also be listed under "Applies to:" according to how Microsoft usually writes their documentation as I explained.
 * Not really. No. The documents are written by two different people and this could simply be an oversight. Argument from silence is a weak argument without proper support.
 * I tried looking up the edition comparison matrix but WDAG was not yet added to it. Also, the Enterprise and Education editions are not yet finalized, as they are distributed in different channels are reach their customers with a deliberate delay.
 * In any case, patience is one of the most important virtues of an encyclopedia writer. We could always wait a while before jumping to conclusion.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:34, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

It appears the two editions don't have feature parity anymore anyway. The Education edition is missing support for creating ReFS volumes. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 09:55, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Free Windows 10 upgrade ending
Hi.

Because of a potential for factual inaccuracy, I deleted the statement saying Windows 10 free upgrade offer has ended (at least for some people). I believe it is best if Wikipedia remain silent on this matter, because of this:



To summarize them: They say Microsoft has explicitly announced that the free upgrade offer has ended, but it is still offering it. All you have to do is to perform a clean installation of the appropriate edition of Windows 10 and refuse to give (postpone giving) a product key, or perform the upgrade installation. Next time you try to connect to the Internet, Microsoft will activate your Windows 10 for you.

Now, these sources are quite old, respectively by 10 months and 5 months. But yesterday, I installed Windows 10 Pro on an HP and a Vaio laptop, one with upgrade and one with a clean installation; Microsoft activated them for me. (So, now, I have two extra Windows licenses which I had purchased!) Of course, both laptops previously had Windows 7 on them, so the Windows Activation Technology 2.0 certificate is already integrated into their firmware. Hence, Microsoft is able to confirm that I was indeed doing a de facto upgrade in both cases.

Best regards,Codename Lisa (talk) 05:56, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

outdated
The information here seems very outdated. --Ikar.us (talk) 10:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) It says Windows10 is functionally equivalent to 8.1. This was (perhaps) true for the initial release, but is not for the current releases.
 * 2) It says there is a grace period of few months after each feature update. The current grace period is three updates, which yields 18 months.
 * Hello, Ikar.us
 * It appears you have misread. There two sentences: "It [=Pro edition] is functionally equivalent to Windows 8.1 Pro " and "Windows 10 Enterprise [...] is functionally equivalent to Windows 8.1 Enterprise ." That's correct and not outdated.
 * Please show a source to that effect. Thanks in advance.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * So what is functionally equivalent intended to mean?
 * Please show a source for your claimed effect.
 * Otherwise, look at your WSUS update list.
 * Or look at https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=1607.
 * Or look at any computer running Anniversary Update and receiving regular updates.
 * Or look at https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/windowsitpro/2017/07/27/waas-simplified-and-aligned/.
 * --Ikar.us (talk) 09:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You appear to be confusing the two separate concepts "functionally equivalent" and "essentially the same" Functionally equivalent means that Windows 10 Enterprise attempts to do the same sort of job for the same sort of users as Windows 8.1 Enterprise. It doesn't mean that they do the job just as well, or using the same features. In like manner, if a Windows 8 education version existed it would be functionally equivalent to Windows 10 Education and not to Windows 10 Enterprise, even though Windows 10 Enterprise and Windows 10 Education are a lot more alike than ant version of 8 and 10 are. The key is the word "functionally" it means "serves the same function". --Guy Macon (talk) 15:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You appear to mean Serves the same purpose? Function(ally) is dubious. As technician, I understand functionally equivalent as drop-in replacement. --Ikar.us (talk) 11:37, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi again. You seem to have understood completely right. In fact, I believe the drop-in replacement article does admirable job of describing exactly what happens if one upgrades from, say, Windows 8 Enterprise to Windows 10 Enterprise.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 13:16, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Why was "Except LTSB" removed without cites or talk ?
The edit is labeled as a graphical only fix, but it changes content of the Enterprise as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_10_editions&diff=807826178&oldid=807819004

Is there any information that the new

Since different versions of LTSB/LTSC would have different features, they should also have their own column.

I do not agree with the current setup, I would like if all the edition differences be split into versions, each having it's own column and then another chart for the each of the redstone releases. The point where there is no LTSB release would simply leave a placeholder column with N/A written to it. Herakotamo (talk) 02:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * The removal of "Except LTSB" was a last minute change; sorry for forgetting the edit summary.


 * Nevertheless, I deleted it because it fails verification and is category 2 patent nonsense. I explain these one by one:
 * Content that fail verification are deleted and the burden of proof is on the person who inserts.
 * Category 2 patent nonsense the kind of meaningless statement whose author intended them to have a meaning, but failed to delivery them. What did the author mean here? That Microsoft Edge is not available in Windows 10 Enterprise edition if it is acquired from or switched to the LTSB channel? (Nonsense alert!) Windows 10 Enterprise cannot be switched to the LTSB channel. The only edition of Windows 10 that is available on the LTSB channel is called Enterprise LTSB edition. Whereas its similarly named sibling Enterprise edition is the most feature-rich edition, the Enterprise LTSB edition is the most feature-deprived edition.


 * For what I said above, you can conceive that the mentioned nonsensical statement could mislead people into thinking the "Enterprise" edition and "Enterprise LTSB" editions are similar except in having Microsoft Edge.


 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Good edit. Related question: Isn't Enterprise LTSB N edition is the most feature-deprived edition? --Guy Macon (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Naughty, naughty! ;)
 * My information, as of this writing, is only accurate at edition level, not variant and SKU level. There are a lot of things I'd like to know, e.g., I know that 32-bit SKUs can't have Hyper-V, but I don't know whether a 32-bit Enterprise LTSB is more feature-deprived than a 64-bit Enterprise LTSB, because I don't know whether Enterprise LTSB features include Hyper-V in the first place.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:13, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

S Mode
@User:Codename Lisa You reverted my edit about Window 10 S mode. You reverted my edit about Window 10 S mode. I appreciate that there are a lot of announcements by MS that aren't followed up and computer news sites will publish anything that attracts readers. However this S mode is already actually implemented in the Redstone 4 (public beta) version of Windows. In fact S mode is already present in the Entreprise edition of Windows 10. The only news is that it's also going to be implemented in the Home and Pro versions. I agree that we should be cautious with roumors, but removing all mentions of S mode is overdoing it.  PizzaMan  ♨♨♨  08:03, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello,.
 * First, sorry for the reversion; I have installed a gadget that informs me of my talk page messages and lets me act on them. This message was among them. I am uninstalling the gadget.
 * I think I have done enough blunder for today. Let me re-assess the situation. I will come back to you.
 * Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize,, it was very clearly an unintentional mistake. If you want to give feedback to the maker of the gadget on how to repproduce the bug: i had multiple tabs open (in Chrome) and accidentally started editing on your talk page. I then copy-pasted it to the article talk page and closed the tab that was editing your talk page. I had to double-check myself that I hadn't done it the other way around (^.^) Oh, and my apologies for the bad English. In my defense: i'm not a native speaker, but that's no excuse and i'll remember capitalize months from now on (although it will continue to strike me as a somewhat odd. Why months and days, but not hours? See you Monday Three o'Clock...) PizzaMan   ♨♨♨  10:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi. It seems we are having another dispute. So, in the interest of resolving it quickly, I'll be monitoring this thread for any questions you might have about my edit summary. But the gist is: The Microsoft's plan for "Enterprise edition with S Mode" didn't pan out. It turned out into the new plan of having "every edition with S Mode". —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 05:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No dispute. I misinterpreted the sources i listed above. Which shows your point of how unreliable MS's announcements are. Thanks for your vigilance on this.  PizzaMan  ♨♨♨  06:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh boy! Does this mean that I will eventually be able to run Enterprise LTSB N edition with even fewer features? (Smile).


 * Still hoping for MS-DOS Enterprise Edition 2018... --Guy Macon (talk) 08:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You mean the special version with qbasic and antivirus deprecated out of it? And the command prompt for good measures ;-) Still there might be some interesting reliable sources on the topic.  PizzaMan  ♨♨♨  12:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Contributions by User:Rd.Chrxlr
Hello, everyone

Please welcome our new editor,. (Hi! I hope you are reading this. )

Our new colleague had made extensive contributions to this article, which turned out problematic. But as is our policy with all the newcomers, I am writing a full description of what is wrong with them.


 * 1) Content deletion without explanation: This sentence has been deleted without an explanation: "On August 10, 2017, Microsoft announced a Pro for Workstations edition to be made available in September, along with the Fall Creators Update for Windows 10." This by far the most serious mistake because content deletion without explanation is vandalism. ("Vandalism" is such a serious offense that unofficially, editors are forbidden from using this word in connection with other registered editors. But there you have it.) Signs indicate that it was no accident. All deletions of material from Wikipedia must be justified either by a policy forbiding them or through common sense.
 * 2) Synthesis of published material to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the sources (WP:SYNTH): An entire "Enterprise in S mode" edition is added to the article. Microsoft announced but never explicitly called it an "edition". But more importantly, it never saw daylight. In addition, as the article already states, it appears Microsoft is going towards addition of an "S mode" edition into several editions of Windows 10.
 * 3) Addition of pure opinions: The following sentences are the opinion of the writer himself:"Windows 10 Home [...] In terms of upgrade paths, it is functionally equivalent to Starter, Home Basic, and Home Premium editions for Windows 7, and core edition for Windows 8 and 8.1.""Windows 10 Pro [...] In terms of upgrade paths, it is functionally equivalent to Professional and Ultimate editions for Windows 7, and Pro edition for Windows 8 and 8.1." They are not true. There is not such thing as "Windows 10 Professional" (only "Windows 10 Pro"). The comment on the upgrade path only stems from the observation of the free upgrade offer and is WP:SYNTH in nature; other upgrade paths are available. Also, the functionality of Windows 7 editions widely differ from the functionality of Windows 8.x and 10 editions; such a vague comment is far too inaccurate.
 * 4) Addition of unverifiable statements: These are probably the editor's own inventions."Windows 10 Mobile Enterprise (also known as Windows 10 Mobile for Business)""Windows 10 Pro (or Professional)"
 * 5) Damage to the anchor: The anchor "LTSB" is replaced with another "Enterprise LTSB" anchor. This change breaks all links to Windows 10 editions.
 * 6) Other semantic and grammatical mistakes: "Pro Education, Enterprise or Education editions of Windows 10" had been changed into " Windows Pro Education, Enterprise, or Education editions of for Windows 10" implying that there is such thing as "Windows Pro Education for Windows 10"! There isn't. This has occurred in "Pro for Workstations" section, but there is another instance of this mistake in "S" section. Writing the word "thirteen" in boldface goes against WP:BOLDFACE.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

SKU?
No link, no explanation anywhere. Great article :P --jae (talk) 11:45, 11 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Now linked. 86.130.28.61 (talk) 16:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Splitting Windows 10X from the Windows 10 article.
There are a lot of speculations that Microsoft may release Windows 10X as a separate OS. So, I think that it would be better if Windows 10X is scrapped off this article and a separate article is made for it instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:A02D:2956:8C7C:E709:F091:ED47 (talk) 07:41, 23 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree WindowsWorld (talk) 11:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't. Speculation is a poor reason for splitting. The section is very small as-is, and there is no indication that Windows 10X is ever going to be released - especially since Windows 11 has been released. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 03:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I guess WindowsWorld (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Diagnostic data off and Windows 10 education
The reference linked from Minimum Telemetry levels, seems to imply that Windows 10 Education should have same minimum telemetry level as Windows 10 Enterprise. Are there any references for this not being the case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Win10tabledit (talk • contribs) 20:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Add Windows 10 on ARM and Xbox system software to the "Device-specific editions" category
Device-specific editions category isn't contain Windows 10 ARM version and Xbox firmware which is also based on Windows 10 core. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.38.72.233 (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Windows 10 on ARM isn't device-specific, and Xbox system software isn't branded as Windows. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 22:38, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Uncited core count limits
The core count limits in the table are uncited, and I haven't been able to find an official source for these being actual limits. The closest I could find is a Microsoft MVP (not an employee) replying to someone on a forum in July 2015, saying "up to 256 cores" are supported on 64-bit SKUs.

SKU limitations are mostly applied via ProductPolicy, which on my Windows 10 Pro for Workstations install does not have any entry that limits core counts. There is a CPU socket count limitation (Kernel-RegisteredProcessors) which is set to 4, and this matches documented socket limits.

During reverse engineering of ntoskrnl I was unable to find anywhere where core counts are limited based on the SKU. KeRegisteredProcessors is set based on the Kernel-RegisteredProcessors entry in ProductPolicy. This sets the socket count limit. If that entry does not exist, it defaults to 1. KeNumprocSpecified is set based on the NUMPROC boot argument, which seems to limit the number of sockets that are enumerated when this is set. KeMaximumProcessors is set only when the MAXPROC boot argument is set, otherwise it defaults to 0x500 (1280). This appears to be the only limit on core counts, and it's hard-coded in the kernel. This all occurs inside Phase1InitializationDiscard. The only other place where KeMaximumProcessors is written to is in KeStartAllProcessors, and those writes are related to processor group initialisation in the context of dynamic partitioning. The values set here are not influenced by any policy or licensing values.

I suspect that the core count limits listed here are not actual limits, but are in fact based on the socket count limit multiplied by the highest logical core count CPUs that were available at the time, i.e. 1 socket * 64 logical cores = 64 core "limit" on Home, 2 sockets * 64 logical cores = 128 core "limit" on Pro/Edu, and 4 sockets * 64 logical cores = 256 core "limit" on Pro for Workstations. The Windows 10 Enterprise entry says 2 sockets max, which comes from the Groovypost source, but that article itself is unsourced and I can't find any official docs that match the claimed numbers. Based on this forum thread it looks like the Kernel-RegisteredProcessors policy value for Enterprise SKUs is indeed 4, not 2.

All in all, the values seem dubiously sourced and likely wrong. Can anyone find an official source to corroborate the existing values? What's my best approach for fixing the table without falling foul of original research? Gsuberland (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I did a bunch more research and wrote this up as a blog post: https://codeinsecurity.wordpress.com/2022/04/07/cpu-socket-and-core-count-limits-in-windows-10-and-how-to-remove-them/
 * I know it's effectively original research, but the current source is provably wrong on at least one count, and I can't find a single official source on the matter, so I'm going to be bold and edit the page to reflect the correct numbers. Gsuberland (talk) 15:09, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Applocker is not Enterprise-only
Even the applocker-article iteself says, applocker is available in Pro, the table on this article says its limited to enterprise. that's wrong. But as i'm absolutely not familar with wiki editing, i'm not going to mess with that table :D 62.153.61.217 (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)