0

Is there any material functional difference, in the resulting USB install stick, between creating a USB install with a .iso file via Rufus vs. the MS media creation tool. The reason that I am asking is because I would like to know whether I can expect Rufus Windows-10 USB install drive to reinstall to multiple boxes with existing Windows-10 digital license (presumable in the custody of MS servers).

  • Since the license is on the PC, not the USB drive, it shouldn't matter. That said, why not use the media created through the MS tool? – DrMoishe Pippik Sep 16 '18 at 21:45
  • Good question: I use the Rufus tool to create UNIX install bootable drives: I prefer 'one ring (tool) to rule them all'. If there is no material difference, then it should not matter which tool is used. – gatorback Sep 16 '18 at 21:48
1

Is there any material functional difference between creating a USB install with a .iso file via Rufus vs. the MS media creation tool.

The ISO used by the Media Creation Tool is identical to that of the ISO you would use with Rufus.

Is there any material functional difference, in the resulting USB install stick

There is absolutely no difference the resulting installation environment.

-1

Actually there is one HUGE difference between using Rufus and the MS Media Creation Tool....Rufus allows you to choose the partition format, MS doesn't. So, if you create the tool on a USB with MS, on a system that has an MBR hard drive windows will default to that format on the USB you created, and if you try to install it to a drive that is GPT, guess what will happen? Sorry...Windows cannot be installed!

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.