I would like to know from a dev what the requirements are for Qubes Windows Tools (QWT).
All O/S reference are known to be x86_64.
Does QWT require any specific version of Windows 7?
Or will they work with all versions of Windows 7?
Why does QWT require TESTSIGNING to be turned on?
Is that because Win7 requires things to be signed?
What are the CPU/RAM requirements for running QWT Seamless Mode?
Why not have QWT be it's own GUI rather than explorer.exe, and also replace the login shell for windows?
Or is that something that would be difficult to do?
Only a few questions here, I'll keep the rest that may also depend on the answers to those.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,
Drew.
>
> What are the CPU/RAM requirements for running QWT Seamless Mode?
As far as I can tell, they are no different. I myself generally assign 2 cores of a modern cpu + 1.2-2gb ram. Works well enough
>
> Why not have QWT be it's own GUI rather than explorer.exe, and also replace the login shell for windows?
> Or is that something that would be difficult to do?
I would assume so, yes.
Doesn't even BEGIN to answer the question.
> >
> > Why does QWT require TESTSIGNING to be turned on?
> > Is that because Win7 requires things to be signed?
> https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/windows-appvms/
> "Before proceeding with the installation we need to disable Windows mechanism that allows only signed drivers to be installed, because currently (beta releases) the drivers we provide as part of the Windows Tools are not digitally signed with a publicly recognizable certificate."
Still doesn't answer that question either.
I said "hi devs" because I needed someone with the knowledge of WHY, not just an end user reason, but a dev description that is technical.
>
> >
> > What are the CPU/RAM requirements for running QWT Seamless Mode?
> As far as I can tell, they are no different. I myself generally assign 2 cores of a modern cpu + 1.2-2gb ram. Works well enough
That tells me nothing.
That only tells me what you assign to a Windows Guest.
What it doesn't tell me is what the tools require in seamless mode, including but not limited to the Windows Guest and Dom0.
Further to that question being answered was... How many resources does it require per window that is converted to it's own display window?
Along with, Is there a big difference for requirements comparing 1440x900 and 1920x1080 ?
> > Why not have QWT be it's own GUI rather than explorer.exe, and also replace the login shell for windows?
> > Or is that something that would be difficult to do?
> I would assume so, yes.
You don't know, so you are not a dev?
The thing is they are already separating the windows to make individual windows on Dom0, even though each of those are merely the overlapped windows in windows itself, and they remain overlapped in windows.
I am inquiring this in technical form so that I can further understand some things in regards to parts that I"m looking at at the moment.
While I do appreciate user involvement, I prefer you to not answer what you have no idea about, that keeps things clean and me not getting frustrated because an end user tries to answer a technical question that they have no idea about nor the knowledge of what is involved in such a task.
So please, refrain from answering my questions with details that don't answer anything. If the website had the information, I would not be asking.
So long as you do not ask sufficiently specific questions that indicate why that doesn't answer your question, I see little reason for you to demand a dev's time.
> I said "hi devs" because I needed someone with the knowledge of WHY, not just an end user reason, but a dev description that is technical.
Ask technical questions, you might get technical answers. All you do is ask exceedingly generic questions that betray little technical background, given that you don't seem to realize that you're asking insufficiently specific questions to get the answers/attention you seek.
> > > What are the CPU/RAM requirements for running QWT Seamless Mode?
> > As far as I can tell, they are no different. I myself generally assign 2 cores of a modern cpu + 1.2-2gb ram. Works well enough
>
> That tells me nothing.
please stop using all this hyperbole.
> That only tells me what you assign to a Windows Guest.
> What it doesn't tell me is what the tools require in seamless mode, including but not limited to the Windows Guest and Dom0.
I'm sorry, but what I'm missing here is your explanation/indication as to what you have already tried yourself, and why the information you seek could not be retrieved by you installing a w7 VM, installing the tools, and checking ram use in a running VM; and secondly, if you had indeed checked that out before asking it here, why that information wasn't useful/sufficiently informative to you.
> Further to that question being answered was... How many resources does it require per window that is converted to it's own display window?
> Along with, Is there a big difference for requirements comparing 1440x900 and 1920x1080 ?
Again, please indicate why this information is important to you, in an age where 16gb ram is easily achievable on any home pc. Also indicate what kind of programs you wish to run, as I would think that some are rather more demanding than others.
> > > Why not have QWT be it's own GUI rather than explorer.exe, and also replace the login shell for windows?
> > > Or is that something that would be difficult to do?
> > I would assume so, yes.
>
> You don't know, so you are not a dev?
What's with these rhetorical questions? Did you mistake this for a high-school debate class, and are you hoping to score "points"?
> The thing is they are already separating the windows to make individual windows on Dom0, even though each of those are merely the overlapped windows in windows itself, and they remain overlapped in windows.
>
> I am inquiring this in technical form so that I can further understand some things in regards to parts that I"m looking at at the moment.
again, this is way too vague.
>
> While I do appreciate user involvement, I prefer you to not answer what you have no idea about, that keeps things clean and me not getting frustrated because an end user tries to answer a technical question that they have no idea about nor the knowledge of what is involved in such a task.
The reason I do not provide the answers you seek has much more to do with the horrible lack of precision of those questions, than with anything relating to me. If you cannot clarify what you want to know, AND make it clear to the person who you are asking to spend time answering your questions that you have sufficient expertise to appreciate the answer, I would respectfully suggest that you don't hold your breath waiting for an answer, as you are not likely to get it.
>
> So please, refrain from answering my questions with details that don't answer anything. If the website had the information, I would not be asking.
I would have, if that had been the case.
Anyway, I'll leave you to it from now. I hope that my reply helps you to understand why you are not getting the answers you say you seek.
I said VERSION, not EDITION.
> > > > Why does QWT require TESTSIGNING to be turned on? Is that because
> > > > Win7 requires things to be signed?
> > > https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/windows-appvms/ "Before proceeding with
> > > the installation we need to disable Windows mechanism that allows
> > > only signed drivers to be installed, because currently (beta
> > > releases) the drivers we provide as part of the Windows Tools are
> > > not digitally signed with a publicly recognizable certificate."
> >
> > Still doesn't answer that question either.
> >
> > I said "hi devs" because I needed someone with the knowledge of WHY,
> > not just an end user reason, but a dev description that is technical.
>
> Again, that really *does* answer your question. Windows 7 requires
> drivers to be signed by a recognised certificate. The Qubes Tools
> drivers are *not* signed by a recognised certificate, so to make them
> work one needs to toggle the TESTSIGNING flag so that Windows 7 no
> longer cares about their certificates.
Okay, it seems you can't understand a simple questions so I will rectify it to be more the way I would have normally asked it before I started asking the questions in a way that more people can understand, again, you are not a dev...
Why do you need testsigning on when you can easily get a certificate for signing your software when people could intercept with unsigned software that will cause harm instead of goo and cause that guest machine to be infected and mean that qubes wasn't doing things right security wise?
Does that better clarify the question that I'm asking as to the WHY?
> > [...]
> >
> > So please, refrain from answering my questions with details that don't
> > answer anything. If the website had the information, I would not be
> > asking.
>
> It sounds like the web site *does* include the information, you failed
> to find it (or didn't look), someone answered by pointing you at the
> right information and you merely insulted them in reply. Glad to see
> you're still trolling here, Drew... :-/
If you read my current reply, you will see that it doesn't answer the question(s)
True, but he wasn't a dev, so I saw no reason to give more information.
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Why does QWT require TESTSIGNING to be turned on?
> > > > Is that because Win7 requires things to be signed?
> > > https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/windows-appvms/
> > > "Before proceeding with the installation we need to disable Windows mechanism that allows only signed drivers to be installed, because currently (beta releases) the drivers we provide as part of the Windows Tools are not digitally signed with a publicly recognizable certificate."
> >
> > Still doesn't answer that question either.
>
> So long as you do not ask sufficiently specific questions that indicate why that doesn't answer your question, I see little reason for you to demand a dev's time.
The question was perfectly stated, I was after a technical WHY, not an end-user WHY.
> > I said "hi devs" because I needed someone with the knowledge of WHY, not just an end user reason, but a dev description that is technical.
> Ask technical questions, you might get technical answers. All you do is ask exceedingly generic questions that betray little technical background, given that you don't seem to realize that you're asking insufficiently specific questions to get the answers/attention you seek.
>
> > > > What are the CPU/RAM requirements for running QWT Seamless Mode?
> > > As far as I can tell, they are no different. I myself generally assign 2 cores of a modern cpu + 1.2-2gb ram. Works well enough
> >
> > That tells me nothing.
> please stop using all this hyperbole.
It was the FIRST sentence before the explanation.
> > That only tells me what you assign to a Windows Guest.
> > What it doesn't tell me is what the tools require in seamless mode, including but not limited to the Windows Guest and Dom0.
>
> I'm sorry, but what I'm missing here is your explanation/indication as to what you have already tried yourself, and why the information you seek could not be retrieved by you installing a w7 VM, installing the tools, and checking ram use in a running VM; and secondly, if you had indeed checked that out before asking it here, why that information wasn't useful/sufficiently informative to you.
That information doesn't tell me enough.
It doesn't tell me what it REQUIRES. It only tells me what it's using.
The devs would know what it requires.
Please, my questions are very specific.
>
> > Further to that question being answered was... How many resources does it require per window that is converted to it's own display window?
> > Along with, Is there a big difference for requirements comparing 1440x900 and 1920x1080 ?
> Again, please indicate why this information is important to you, in an age where 16gb ram is easily achievable on any home pc. Also indicate what kind of programs you wish to run, as I would think that some are rather more demanding than others.
Dom0 has 4 GB RAM. I have dual GPUs.
I'm talking about running Windows.
I have asked questions before and got no answer, so I thought I'd ask a DIFFERENT WAY than what I normally do and provide information and then find out why such and such is going wrong.
IF you want to know that, just search for my posts regarding the Windows Tools.
They are hard to miss, there are enough of them.
>
> > > > Why not have QWT be it's own GUI rather than explorer.exe, and also replace the login shell for windows?
> > > > Or is that something that would be difficult to do?
> > > I would assume so, yes.
> >
> > You don't know, so you are not a dev?
> What's with these rhetorical questions? Did you mistake this for a high-school debate class, and are you hoping to score "points"?
rhetorical question because it was there and available. Just pushing my point that he is not a dev, and the whole thing is directed at devs, so only devs OR people that know enough technical information should be answering.
>
> > The thing is they are already separating the windows to make individual windows on Dom0, even though each of those are merely the overlapped windows in windows itself, and they remain overlapped in windows.
> >
> > I am inquiring this in technical form so that I can further understand some things in regards to parts that I"m looking at at the moment.
> again, this is way too vague.
> >
> > While I do appreciate user involvement, I prefer you to not answer what you have no idea about, that keeps things clean and me not getting frustrated because an end user tries to answer a technical question that they have no idea about nor the knowledge of what is involved in such a task.
>
> The reason I do not provide the answers you seek has much more to do with the horrible lack of precision of those questions, than with anything relating to me. If you cannot clarify what you want to know, AND make it clear to the person who you are asking to spend time answering your questions that you have sufficient expertise to appreciate the answer, I would respectfully suggest that you don't hold your breath waiting for an answer, as you are not likely to get it.
Well, if I don't make the questions more simple then they are too complex for people to understand, it is something I have not perfected and I know by simplifying questions they can become too generic.
But my questions are related to DEVS, so that defines a technical information requirement. Perhaps I should have been more explicit in that requirement?
>
> >
> > So please, refrain from answering my questions with details that don't answer anything. If the website had the information, I would not be asking.
> I would have, if that had been the case.
>
> Anyway, I'll leave you to it from now. I hope that my reply helps you to understand why you are not getting the answers you say you seek.
I should, when someone that knows the answers responds.
That is precise to an end-user, but I wanted a technical explanation. As I said in a recent post, which may be worth you reading that sentence that also relates here.
Jeremy, I missed your trolling me like this.
Thanks for showing me you aren't ignoring me and are actually making the time to come on here just to troll me again.
Thanks!
By version I mean VERSION.
Because there are many versions.
You could have 1.01, 1.02, 1.03, 1.04 (as example of version numbers)
You can even turn on the display of the version number in Windows.
My version number is currently Version 6.1.7601 for my Windows 7 Guest.
> You need to *ask a better question* rather than insulting the person
> answering.
In future, please know what you are talking about before you try to defame someone who asks the correct question.
> It gives me no pleasure (well...) to gang up on a guy who obviously doesn't have the slightest notion of what it means to possess even a modicum of social grace. But in the absence of a downvote button, how else do you voice your disapproval of a community member that is as ignorant as he is arrogant and who repeatedly insults fellow users that try to help?
Well, I did not intentionally insult the person who first answered my questions at the start of my response.
All he did was give me links that I had already read, that are the first things I go to before I speak here.
My entire post was directed at devs, so posted towards the devs, but posted here in users to allow others with the knowledge to provide an answer as well if they had the answer.
> [BTW, it's all Marek's fault for having the extraordinary patience to indulge this buffoon with a straight face.]
>
Marek's one of the very few people that have ever taken the time to actually read what I write and give me a solid answer to what I ask.
I have great respect for that man.
>
> You should have stuck to Edition and just said, "Thanks for the answer", because now you look like a bigger idiot than when you began. A Windows version/build/release is just a collection of installed updates. That means that whatever version you install changes the moment you update it. Did you expect the devs to test every possible combination of Windows updates? Or to test a buggy old release?
>
IF you had READ what I wrote, you would have seen me say that I did appreciate it. Maybe you missed that bit?
Well, you do know what the version is. At least you can tell the difference between version and edition. That puts you one step higher than most of the other people here.
I do not expect them to have done that, but if they said it needs at least version 1.6.7601, then I would have said "ok thanks", or else they could have said they need version X of this and Y of that and A of the other... And listed that they need specific things for the tools to work correctly.
>
> Perfectly. Drew, thank you for refining your initial question to make it more "technical".
> Because now, the answer is...
> EXACTLY THE SAME as the one Foppe gave you at the outset.
Nope, that is not the answer, and doesn't answer the question.
If it does and I have misunderstood, then please, explain.
>
> My bad, here's the technical version coming from an end-user: RTFM. (The answer starts with R- and ends with -PM.) I know it's hard to believe but, #IAmNotADev.
>
You may not be a dev, but you have the technical knowledge to know more than the end-users that don't know enough to answer the question(s)
> Oh, you wanted a specific answer... Well, if you're performing a Gaussian Blur on a 16 megapixel photo of Donald Trump eating a Taco using Photoshop, then you need 3,824,110,293 bytes of RAM and 2 cores. On the other hand, if you're playing Minesweeper while eating a taco yourself, then the requirement changes to 2,015,289,787 bytes of RAM and 1.42 cores.
>
> And now... in the #DevFetish + #LeaveMarekAlone category:
That doesn't answer my question. That isn't Qubes Windows Tools, that's different applications.
Here I was thinking you had brains and you were even starting to gain my respect, but now you say this and become so stupid I have to say, you are just trolling me, and you have entered into the realm of Jeremy Rand, the person on this forum that blocked me because I was right and he was wrong and he keeps trying to make me look bad and say bad things just to defame me and troll me. Which I was sick of, so I made him block me, so, now, please, do the same thing.
>
> You're too modest. You make people's heads explode with your mastery of complex subjects - for fun!
No, not at all, it just turns out that way sometimes.
> Just including some highlights so Jeremy doesn't feel like he's missing out.
lol, you provide stuff for the troll?
> And a rhetorical question: What happens if /dev/null overflows?
That's just like "How much food do I have to eat before I am full?"
Well, how am I to make a worthwhile contribution when there are so many bugs and I provide details to get them fixed but they are ignored because everyone causes them to get lost in an array of insults towards me and bad information thrown around confusing my good data in the mix?
> What about remoiving Qubes and install a nice Ubuntu or Mint on your
> machine and be happy about your life?
>
No thanks, I don't use end-user only operating systems.
> > As I said in a recent post, which may be worth you reading that sentence that also relates here.
>
> None of your posts have ever been worth reading so please forgive the
> ret of the world not having read most of them.
Maybe they weren't worth reading because your IQ is too low to understand them?
Or maybe the fact is that you read people attacking me for no reason, and you take heir side because you don't want to be the odd one out even though I'm right, and taking a stand, and providing good information and asking the right questions and being misunderstood, and none but the devs actually understand most of the time?
There are a few in the users forum here that do understand and actually try to help after actually reading the questions and information. Most people skim over it and interpret what isn't meant to be interpreted, and thus come out with thoughts and details that are completely the opposite of what I was saying/asking.
As far as version goes, my statement was about version, not edition. Thus when I was provided information about edition not version, I had to make them understand.
> Serious advice: whether you intend it or not, Drew, a large number of
> your posts come across to many people here as impolite, aggressive &
> demanding. This is not generally the case with other posters. The fact
> that many people feel the same about your posts should tell you
> something.
Often, in the past, when I have posted, I added in information saying not to take my posts the wrong way. And yet people still did.
Because I've had that problem in the past, but people just don't read, and thus they interpret my posts when there is no interpretation to be made. And so they misunderstand or take offense. My posts are most often explicitly to the point, no beating around the bush.
> For example, here's how your current question could have been asked in a
> better way.
>
>
> === THE RIGHT WAY ===
>
>
> > > > Does QWT require any specific version of Windows 7?
> > >
> > > That's covered here: https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/windows-tools-3/
> >
> > Ah, sorry, you misunderstand me: I meant version as in 'Windows 7
> > version 6.1.7601', not the Edition. Are there any specific
> > requirements relating to that?
> >
> > ...
>
>
> Whereas your discussion went like this
>
>
> === THE WRONG WAY ===
>
>
> > > > Does QWT require any specific version of Windows 7?
> > >
> > > That's covered here: https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/windows-tools-3/
> >
> > Doesn't even BEGIN to answer the question.
>
>
> You see the difference? Your follow-up reply was inappropriate. It
> didn't actually explain what you wanted, it didn't help them to help
> you, and it led to this ridiculous thread.
>
> Hope this helps, genuinely.
My reply made them use their brain to try to find the reason why, or else to ASK the reason why IF they couldn't figure it out. Yours just provided them information that made them not need to think or anything.
What I wanted was explained in the original question. there was no need for explanation of it because the question was "version" not "edition".
I see the fact that it may have been worded the wrong way, but I just get straight to the point, and say it as it is without beating around the bush, as I said earlier in the post.
My posts are not meant to be taken the wrong way. When there is nothing to be interpreted people interpret it and thus causing it to be offensive.
Or else they read it and don't think of it as informative (as per your example of my reply), and that they should just query, and not have everyone go off the deep end about it.
I had figured that by now everyone had already known about the things I normally put into my post to say not to misunderstand.
I will have to put that statement back in to avoid the harassment that I am getting again from people, since that is the reason once again.
thank you for bringing it to my attention, I will endeavor to be more careful in the future regarding the way I word the replies, and I will beat around the bush a little to be more polite rather than stating it as it is.
In this post the statement isn't here, because I have not gone to find it yet in pasts posts. thanks again for brining the actual issue to my attention so that I can improve myself and work on that.
Sincerely,
Drew.