From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

Hi All,

I have seen s few remarks about being forced to set up a
spyware account with your email at the initial Windows
11 installation.

Here is how to get around it. Print this out and have
it at the ready:

-T



Windows 11 M$ Account Bypass: 2025-04-03

Reference:
https://memstechtips.com/best-windows-11-microsoft-account-bypass/


[1] at the "Let's add your Microsoft account" screen,
press <shift><f10> (or <shift><Fn><f10> on laptops) to open a
command shell

[2] Enter the following command:
start ms-cxh:localonly

[3] a new window will open allowing you to create a local user account directly
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On Fri, 4/17/2026 8:23 AM, T wrote:

Hi All,

I have seen s few remarks about being forced to set up a
spyware account with your email at the initial Windows
11 installation.

Here is how to get around it.-a Print this out and have
it at the ready:

-T

Windows 11 M$ Account Bypass: 2025-04-03

Reference:
-a-a https://memstechtips.com/best-windows-11-microsoft-account-bypass/

[1] at the "Let's add your Microsoft account" screen,
-a-a-a press <shift><f10> (or <shift><Fn><f10> on laptops) to open a command shell

[2] Enter the following command:
-a-a-a start ms-cxh:localonly

[3] a new window will open allowing you to create a local user account directly

The techniques will gradually age out. It won't be any different for Rufus.
If a mechanism is gone, then a tick box cannot be offered.

https://www.reddit.com/r/GeekSquad/comments/1o0idi3/microsoft_disabling_use_of_start_mscxhlocalonly/

On the other hand, we have articles like this, equally jaw dropping and unbelievable.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-11-local-account-microsoft-account/

What a time to be alive. So many grifters. Even my HVAC company tried to grift me a week ago.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

T wrote:

Here is how to get around it.

... this week.

Maybe 26H2 will break that, whereas the ability to create a temporary
MSA, then trash it afterwards leaving local accounts behind will remain
the same ...



--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/17/26 5:23 AM, T wrote:

Hi All,

I have seen s few remarks about being forced to set up a
spyware account with your email at the initial Windows
11 installation.

My latest Windows toy (a CHUWI 2-in-1 Touchscreen Laptop 10.51", 16GB RAM
512GB SSD, Intel N150, Windows 11, Portable Mini Laptop, 2K FHD IPS
Display, Backlit Keyboard, WiFi 6, BT 5.2, Camera, Ty-C-|--i) surprised me by
initially setting me up with with a local account with not even a choice
for a MSA. And boy did MS complain later. Then in one of their later
updates they slipped it in. Sneaky. I didn't notice until they were several
pages in and wanted my personal info. No biggie. I just used my fake name
and email (initials AJL - don't tell anyone) as before. MS said they were
happy to have me back. And to be honest I did kinda miss the store...
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/17/26 06:06, Paul wrote:

The techniques will gradually age out. It won't be any different for Rufus. If a mechanism is gone, then a tick box cannot be offered.

https://www.reddit.com/r/GeekSquad/comments/1o0idi3/ microsoft_disabling_use_of_start_mscxhlocalonly/

M$ really, really, really wants the user to be the "product" not the "customer"

I would presume that if M$ wants anyone without an Internet
connection to be able top use the trash, they will have to
have some mechanism available.


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/17/26 07:28, Andy Burns wrote:

T wrote:

Here is how to get around it.

... this week.

Maybe 26H2 will break that, whereas the ability to create a temporary
MSA, then trash it afterwards leaving local accounts behind will remain
the same ...

On no fooling! Do yo remember when it was just as easy as
putting in aaa.bbb.com for the eMail address?

I can't wait to see what M$ pulls on the customer
with Windows 12 !!!
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/17/26 09:27, AJL wrote:

On 4/17/26 5:23 AM, T wrote:

Hi All,

I have seen s few remarks about being forced to set up a
spyware account with your email at the initial Windows
11 installation.

My latest Windows toy (a CHUWI 2-in-1 Touchscreen Laptop 10.51", 16GB RAM 512GB SSD, Intel N150, Windows 11, Portable Mini Laptop, 2K FHD IPS
Display, Backlit Keyboard, WiFi 6, BT 5.2, Camera, Ty-C-|--i) surprised me by initially setting me up with with a local account with not even a choice
for a MSA. And boy did MS complain later. Then in one of their later
updates they slipped it in. Sneaky. I didn't notice until they were several pages in and wanted my personal info. No biggie. I just used my fake name
and email (initials AJL - don't tell anyone) as before. MS said they were happy to have me back. And to be honest I did kinda miss the store...

I've seen that on a couple of Lenovo laptops. I was proud
of Lenovo. Glad to see it migrating to other places
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/17/26 06:06, Paul wrote:

On the other hand, we have articles like this, equally jaw dropping and unbelievable.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-11-local-account-microsoft-account/

"Now, a Microsoft VP has hinted that he's working on a
way around this annoyance."

I second your "unbelievable" remark. M$ likes to lie
their asses off. "Vista the most reliable and fastest
Windows yet!"
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 19/04/2026 02:58, T wrote:

On 4/17/26 06:06, Paul wrote:

On the other hand, we have articles like this, equally jaw dropping
and unbelievable.


https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-11-local-account-microsoft-account/

-a-a-a-a "Now, a Microsoft VP has hinted that he's working on a
-a-a-a-a way around this annoyance."

I second your "unbelievable" remark.-a M$ likes to lie
their asses off.-a "Vista the most reliable and fastest
Windows yet!"

FYI: Windows Vista ran fine if you gave it 2GB RAM.
Microsoft downgraded the minimum requirements to 1GB when manufacturers whinged about their profit margins.
--
Regards
wasbit
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/19/26 01:10, wasbit wrote:

FYI: Windows Vista ran fine if you gave it 2GB RAM.

It ran like an unstable dog on my customers no
matter how much ram it had.

This one minute video will explain it to you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxpuNCJim3M


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

wasbit <wasbit@removehotmail.com> wrote:

On 19/04/2026 02:58, T wrote:

On 4/17/26 06:06, Paul wrote:

On the other hand, we have articles like this, equally jaw dropping
and unbelievable.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-11-local-account-microsoft-account/

aaaa "Now, a Microsoft VP has hinted that he's working on a
aaaa way around this annoyance."

I second your "unbelievable" remark.a M$ likes to lie
their asses off.a "Vista the most reliable and fastest
Windows yet!"

FYI: Windows Vista ran fine if you gave it 2GB RAM.
Microsoft downgraded the minimum requirements to 1GB when manufacturers whinged about their profit margins.

Indeed. Vista was perfectly fine. Users not familiar with the new
security model of course needed some time to adjust, but users of Real Operating Systems (TM) had very little problems.

I just checked my notes and my machine indeed had 2GB RAM.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On Sun, 4/19/2026 6:57 AM, T wrote:

On 4/19/26 01:10, wasbit wrote:

FYI: Windows Vista ran fine if you gave it 2GB RAM.

It ran like an unstable dog on my customers no
matter how much ram it had.

This one minute video will explain it to you:
-a-a-a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxpuNCJim3M

Video isn't available here, perhaps this is similar ?

# "Vista == We're All Going To Die!!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IfnjBHtjHc

The few times I've run Vista in a VM, it didn't seem
noteworthy one way or another. Didn't crash on me,
while I was trying to do Windows Update to an
up-to-date result.

The best way to test, would be on a machine with ECC,
or at least, use one of the more modern RAM types
(DDR3,DDR4,DDR5) so that RAM issues aren't the root cause.

Also, my experience is, any time you're having a stability
problem on Windows, run Linux on the same machine and compare.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On Sun, 4/19/2026 10:13 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

wasbit <wasbit@removehotmail.com> wrote:

On 19/04/2026 02:58, T wrote:

On 4/17/26 06:06, Paul wrote:

On the other hand, we have articles like this, equally jaw dropping
and unbelievable.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-11-local-account-microsoft-account/ >>>

-a-a-a-a "Now, a Microsoft VP has hinted that he's working on a
-a-a-a-a way around this annoyance."

I second your "unbelievable" remark.-a M$ likes to lie
their asses off.-a "Vista the most reliable and fastest
Windows yet!"

FYI: Windows Vista ran fine if you gave it 2GB RAM.
Microsoft downgraded the minimum requirements to 1GB when manufacturers
whinged about their profit margins.

Indeed. Vista was perfectly fine. Users not familiar with the new
security model of course needed some time to adjust, but users of Real Operating Systems (TM) had very little problems.

I just checked my notes and my machine indeed had 2GB RAM.

There are also a couple settings you can use to cause
the OS to not use all of the RAM. If you needed to reduce a 2GB machine
to running off 1GB, you can do that without taking the side off.

Innovations since WinXP are:

1) Allowing the paged and unpaged pools to use close to the entire RAM
on the machine. WinXP only allowed a percentage to be used, and
my assumption is that garbage collection was what kept the machine
running under those conditions. Your paged and unpaged pools were
quite frequently full, so "something" must be happening behind
the scenes to maintain the dynamic equilibrium of the pools.

2) Invention of the Memory Compressor, as an adjunct to having
a pagefile. To view the Memory Compressor on your current OS,
you can use Process Explorer from Sysinternals, as Task Manager
refuses to display a process where certain metadata is missing.

When the system RAM is "kernel-sized", the Memory Compressor stays
railed on one core. When the system RAM is equal to the "recommended system minimum RAM", the Memory Compressor is normally stopped, as long as you
are not launching new things. So one of the ways of "determining the minimum", is watching what the Memory Compressor is doing, or watching the fault rate
in Process Explorer.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/19/26 07:52, Paul wrote:

Also, my experience is, any time you're having a stability
problem on Windows, run Linux on the same machine and compare.

I do the same thing. Lest me test if the issue is
hardware or software. 90% of the time it is
software, but not always.

I would not have a job if not for M$'s atrocious quality.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 20.04.2026 08:30, T wrote:

On 4/19/26 07:52, Paul wrote:

Also, my experience is, any time you're having a stability
problem on Windows, run Linux on the same machine and compare.

I do the same thing.-a Lest me test if the issue is
hardware or software.-a 90% of the time it is
software, but not always.

I would not have a job if not for M$'s atrocious quality.

I guess it was all on a case by case basis. It ran better than XP for me personally, with 1GB of ram. I remember having an issue on XP which
would detect the available amount of memory wrong (It would say I had
more than I did), and that caused a BSOD quite often. I tried updating
the BIOS, changing the RAM sticks, the works.

On the other hand, Vista detected it correctly right off the bat, and
was almost rock solid for me. It even made me actually buy a Windows
license, the first legal Windows I had. Used it until I upgraded that
machine and switched to Win 7 at some point.

I still miss Vista tbh.
--
-Nick

Take care, it's a desert out there
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-11

On 4/20/26 07:24, Nick wrote:

On 20.04.2026 08:30, T wrote:

On 4/19/26 07:52, Paul wrote:

Also, my experience is, any time you're having a stability
problem on Windows, run Linux on the same machine and compare.

I do the same thing.-a Lest me test if the issue is
hardware or software.-a 90% of the time it is
software, but not always.

I would not have a job if not for M$'s atrocious quality.

I guess it was all on a case by case basis. It ran better than XP for me personally, with 1GB of ram. I remember having an issue on XP which
would detect the available amount of memory wrong (It would say I had
more than I did), and that caused a BSOD quite often. I tried updating
the BIOS, changing the RAM sticks, the works.

On the other hand, Vista detected it correctly right off the bat, and
was almost rock solid for me. It even made me actually buy a Windows license, the first legal Windows I had. Used it until I upgraded that machine and switched to Win 7 at some point.

I still miss Vista tbh.

Keep in mind, I only get called when things go wrong.

I had numerous customers that bought new machines and
begs me to back install XP from Vista.

XP stunk when it first came out, but after service
pack 3 was actually pretty stable, well, for an M$
product. 7 was pretty good out the box. Same
with Windows 8 after all the service packs and 8.1.
We all missed Windows Nein. 10 has always been
a bit flaky. 11 added to the flakiness.

Thing about M$ is that they don't improve on what they
have, they like to start over a lot. I can walk up to
Fedora an not be able to tell which version with out
asking the operating system. They improve on what
they have. Same with weird old Mac OS (not sure about
the improvement part).

And very few folks can migrate to Linux due to the
Linux Catch 22 problem.

Can't wait for Windows 12!!!! :'(


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2