Not letting Microsoft spoil a good hack
Kari,
Thank you for your answer.
It seems that my post has offended you somewhat, so some explaining is in order.
I did not complain about your tutorial. I did not criticize it. I did not even took sides between you and Ed Bott. As a matter of fact, I posted a comment taking sides for you in
that ZD Net thread where you debated him.
I thought I had made clear I was appreciative of both the method you describe (in fact, it's what I have wanted to do all along on my PC), and the pains you took explaining it, so I will say it again : I'm impressed by the huge amount of work and the clarity of all the walk-throughs.
Please consider, however, that I do not have the expertise of either you or Ed Bott ; that it's my PC ; that I will have to do the reinstalling and that I will have to live with the results ; and that I will bear responsibility for it, irrespective of whose advice I choose to follow.
Addressing some of your points :
Use of word "legal" inclines that there's something "illegal" in the sysprep method. Bad choice of words there.
Not sure whether you understood I meant it was against the law (of course not) or unsupported/discouraged by Microsoft (Ed Bott's opinion ; not mine). Please consider the quotation marks. That was an attempt at a light-hearted joke. Moreover, nobody (ASFAIK) disputes using Sysprep ; the point in debate is using it to move the Users folder.
That makes me quite frustrated and disappointed; you tell that your Windows has worked without problems but now something has come up, so your first thought is to suspect a procedure you did five years ago?
Really? I repeat: Really?
You sysprepped the Users to another drive 5 years ago and there has been no issues. After 5 years something does not work as you'd like to, and you think it might be because of the sysprep 5 years ago?
I have nothing more to say about that.
Yes. Really.
That's why people reinstall. Something has gone wrong, they don't know what, rot has crept up somehow over the years, so they start all over again and try to do it right this time. Or am I missing something ?
Also, your description is wrong. I did not went suddenly from "no problems at all" to "not working as I would like". If I had, I would have been able to pinpoint the problem, and hopefully restore to a point back in time. And it was not exactly my first thought that moving the Users folder five years ago might be the problem. Maybe the second or third.
Rereading what Ed Bott wrote in that thread (again, please don't be offended ; this is not personal ; I'm not taking sides, I don't even have the technical expertise to do so ; I'm just listening to people presumably more knowledgeable than myself, and trying to make sense of it all) :
If you try to move AppData, things will break. Maybe not right away, but eventually.
Is he right ? Is he wrong ? I don't know. I know I don't want problems.
You said :
I have just tried to simplify the instructions by Microsoft about a procedure they have built in to Windows. See
this screenshot about Microsoft's Windows System Image Manager in Step 9.1 in
customization tutorial, it shows how the option to determine the location of the Users folder as well as the ProgramData folder is built in to a tool made by Microsoft to service and customize a Windows image.
Granted. So what is Microsoft exactly saying about relocating the Users folder, which I think we agree is the disputed point (as opposed to simply using Sysprep) ? Microsoft's pronouncements need not be the last word, but, especially in system-level matters, they certainly need to be taken into account.
In 2013, Bott pointed to
this TechNet page to back up his claim that Microsoft did not support relocating the Users folder. I understand some people (you included) argue that this advice is Vista-related, but has been superseded since. So where does Microsoft stand today ?
I found
this Microsoft Support article, last reviewed on 12/05/2013. It's extraordinary. First by its title :
Relocation of the Users directory and the ProgramData directory to a drive other than the drive that contains the Windows directory
What?! So, moving the Users folder is "legal" -- sorry, supported after all ? Better yet, it would seem that Redmond goes even further than you, and lets us move the ProgramData folder, even though you
warn :
Microsoft does not recommend relocating, moving ProgramData, Program Files, Program Files (x86) and Windows folders.
Indeed, Microsoft seems to sympathise with our concerns :
There are various reasons why you may want to relocate the Users directory or the ProgramData directory to other drives.
For Windows, the most common reasons are as follows:
- It is easier to back up data from a single drive and from a drive that contains only user files.
- It is easier to rebuild the operating system drive on a user’s computer if user data is located on a separate volume. In this case, the drive that contains the Windows directory can be formatted, and Windows can be reinstalled without having to worry about how to remove user data.
Quite !... Jolly good !... At least, we're being heard ! Unfortunately, here comes the small print :
Caution : Using the ProgramData setting to redirect folders to a drive other than the system volume will block your ability to upgrade to future versions of Windows.
OK. We knew this. Not a problem. There seems to be a consensus on the issue. You have described repeatedly how to undo, then redo the relocation to allow upgrading. (Providing one's willing to go through the moves, of course.)
By changing the default location of the user profile directories or program data folders to a volume other than the system volume, you cannot service your Windows installation. Any updates, fixes, or service packs cannot be applied to the installation. We recommend that you do not change the location of the user profile directories or program data folders.
Haha ! Now it gets confusing. We know that's at least not true to a certain extent, since many people (myself included) have managed to apply many updates to such a modified Windows 7 installation. Besides, flat-out
"not recommending" the change while explaining how useful it is and how to do it is a bit... weird.
Note : If you use the FolderLocations unattend setting to move user data to a location other than the %systemdrive% drive, some servicing components may not be installed. These components may include critical updates, security updates, hotfixes, and service packs.
From the context, this might relate only to Vista... however, now it's only
"may not be installed", as opposed to
"cannot be applied" previously. Also...
This issue is resolved if you have installed the servicing stack update for Windows Vista Service Pack 1.
Nobody is still using Vista out there, right ? And furthemore...
Setting information from the Windows AIK and Windows OPK documentation
ProfilesDirectory
The ProfilesDirectory setting specifies the path of the user profile folder.
Use this setting to move the user profile folder (typically %SYSTEMDRIVE%\Users) to another location during Setup or Sysprep. The destination path can be on a volume other than the system drive, as long as it meets the following requirements:
- It must be on an NTFS volume.
- It must not be the path of another operating system user profile folder.
- It must not contain any serviceable components.
This setting can be used to keep system data separate from user data. If Windows is re-installed on the system volume, a user who has administrative rights can manually recover data from this location.
Now it's legit again. (With this vague threat :
"The destination path... must not contain any serviceable components". What prevents Microsoft from making certain
"components" suddenly
"serviceable" through an update ?)
Important : These settings should be used only in a test environment.
Oh, all right, forget it. It's off again. We're talking production machines, not testing situations. It gets more precise :
Microsoft recommends that you do not change the location of the user profile directories or program data folders. This is especially true for Windows Store apps. Changing the location of %programdata% will cause errors when you install, uninstall, or update these apps.
However...
Note : If you use the unattend settings to set up the operating systems that are listed in this article, we will provide commercially reasonable efforts to support your scenario.
OK, it's on again ! So what is that supposed to mean : we know it will work, we will even help you make it work, but we reserve the right to break it someday through whatever update we like, so don't say you haven't been warned ?
We know that Ed Bott has some privileged access to inside Microsoft sources, through his work on books about Windows products. Could it be that his stringent position on the issue derives from credible hints he got from his contacts, roughly on the line I've just described ?
Can anyone make any sense of this ?
As I said on this ZD Net thread two years ago : count me as confused.