OneNote Updates Sticky Notes

Here’s an interesting tidbit. If you install or upgrade OneNote on a Windows PC, it will also upgrade to a new version of Sticky Notes. Check the lead-in graphic: it labels this new version as such, and the old version (lacking that same (new) label)shows up in the Start menu. Hence my assertion that OneNote updates Sticky Notes. But wait: there’s more…

Exactly How OneNote Updates Sticky Notes

This dual appearance persists even after you add the (New) version via a OneNote update (or install). If you quiz that version for its About info, you’ll get the OneNote for Microsoft 365 info . It shows up as (line broken for WordPress readability, original is a one-liner):

Microsoft® OneNote® for Microsoft 365 MSO
(Version 2408 Build 16.0.17928.20114) 64-bit

OTOH, if you quiz the older version, it calls itself a UWP app with version number 6.1.20 (and a 2020 copyright date). Go figure!

Two Versions, or One?

If you want to keep both versions, that’s fine with me. If you want to lose the old version, I’d recommend using WinGet to uninstall same. The name of this app is “Microsoft Sticky Notes” so you need to enclose it in quotes (internal spaces) to get it to work. Or, you can uninstall it using the app id, as follows:

winget uninstall --id 9NBLGGH4QGHW

instead. Your choice. I did the latter on one of my X380 test PCs and it worked correctly. Now, I see only Sticky Notes (New) in the Start menu. Just for grins, I did likewise on my Windows 10 production PC: it behaves in exactly the same way, so this works for both OSes. Cheers!

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

USB Adapter Beats Down-level Port

In seventh grade, my math teacher was named Wayne Mackey. He had an amazing way of cutting and complimenting at the same time. I vividly remember him telling me “Mr. Tittel, you have an AMAZING grasp of the obvious” and puffing up, then collapsing. In today’s blog post, I’m returning to those roots as I observe that it’s better to pay the translation penalty involved in using a Type-A female to USB-C male adapter into a 40 Gbps connection, than to plug into a 5 Gbps Type-A port directly. Duh, but that’s why I lead off with USB adapter beats down-level port.

By How Much USB Adapter Beats Down-level Port?

The throughput difference one versus the other is easily obtained, using CrystalDiskMark as a means for comparison. Plugging the Kingston Data Traveler Max into the ThinkPad T14s Copilot+ PC, I get close to typical UASP rates when I plug its USB-A end into an $8 A-to-C adapter plug. To see that difference, check my September 6 blog Fast UFDs Need Fast USB Ports.

When I plug the device into the 5 Gbps USB-A port on the other side of that selfsame laptop, I get throughput numbers that are  much lower than those values. The adapter numbers appear left, and the direct plug-in results appear right, in the lead-in graphic above.

Those results definitely help me answer this question: is it worth $6-8 to buy a USB A-to-C dongle? I can’t help but answer that one in the affirmative. Yes, I know I’m showing an amazing grasp of the obvious here, but sometimes it helps to see what that means in vivid, undeniable detail. It was true in 7th grade algebra, and it’s still true today (59 years later).

Choose Your Ports Carefully…

There’s at least one other lesson to take away from this side-by-side comparison. It’s what I said in the preceding heading. According to the user manual, the USB-A ports on the ThinkPad T14s are USB 3.1 Gen 1, rated at a speed of 5Gbps (translates to 0.625 GBps or 640 MBps, much higher than what you see in CrystalDiskMark). Sigh.

The other item I take away from this encounter is to ask Lenovo: why put only 5 Gbps USB-A ports on that PC? I’m guessing the answer may be something like “Because that’s what Qualcomm gave us in the Snapdragon X chipset environment.” Sigh again…

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

StartMenuExperienceHost.exe Knocks ReliMon Over

When searching for Windows blog topics, I occasionally drop in on Reliability Monitor (aka ReliMon). FYI, it’s actually a special version of the more general-purpose Performance Monitor (PerfMon). This morning, I saw what I can only describe as a bad-to-worse stability index chart. See the lead-in graphic. Upon examination, I concluded that StartMenuExperienceHost.exe knocks ReliMon over with daily errors. Ouch!

Handling StartMenuExperienceHost.exe Knocks ReliMon Over

Digging into the details, I see this element present every day (multiple times on some days) for 16 of the past 17 days. That’s a new personal record for me, and it’s interesting. Why? Because this system hasn’t been giving me any obvious trouble, repeat SMEH errors notwithstanding. (Hope that abbreviation is obvious…)

So naturally I went looking for enlightenment about SMEH and the related MoBEX error that occurs for each instance in the detail page. Unsurprisingly, I found a registry hack to address the issue at TenForums.com from well-known VIP member Samuria. Apparently, it involves a well-known permissions inheritance issue for values inside the

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\User Shell Folders

key. I’ve applied the fix Samuria recommends, and will observe ReliMon over coming days to see if it helps.

The Enduring Value of Internet Community

Though one must exercise caution in picking up and running with fixes from the Internet, there are gradations of trust and merit in play, too. Because I’ve been an active member of TenForums for years and have seen many, many useful tips from Samuria over that entire interval, I’m comfortable with following his advice. That makes this a “safe fix” IMO. But if you have a recent backup handy, and know how to restore it, you can always get back to where you started. That’s my fallback position, and I’m sticking with it. Cheers!

I’ll keep you posted as I see if this helps … or not. Stay tuned!

Sept 13 follow-up #1: No dice, but…

I got a comment from fellow TenForums VIP OldNavyGuy that told me two things: he tried the reghack and it didn’t work for him. He also build a new user profile and moved over to that, then killed the old one. He reports that did away with the ongoing torrent of StartMenuExperienceHost.exe errors. I’ll try it sometime, and see.

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Considering USB4 External Media

It’s a classic trade-off in more ways than one: cost versus speed. I’m prepping for an AskWoody story about external media on Windows PCs. For me, the big trade-off when considering USB4 external media is higher prices for higher performance. “How much higher?” you ask: that’s what I’m in the process of figuring out right now.

Whole Device Chain Counts When Considering USB4 External Media

Every step in the device chain counts when going for the speediest external Windows media. The starting point from the PC end is the USB port itself. Ideally, it should be USB4 or Thunderbolt 3/4, and support 40 Gbps throughput. Next comes the cable: it should be labeled USB4, Thunderbolt 3 or 4, or 40 Gbps. Next comes the storage device. For me, that mostly means an enclosure housing an NVMe SSD. That enclosure should be USB4 or Thunderbolt 3/4, and the NVMe should be Gen 3 (PCIe x3) or higher.

At every step you pay more to attain the current pinnacle of performance. (I’ve not yet seen any 80 Gbps devices, but they’re coming. Copilot tells me Intel’s 14th Gen HX-series mobile CPUs “are starting to support this technology. “) A quick search at Amazon tells me you can’t buy USB5 cables, docks, and so forth yet. My best guess: we’re looking well into 2025 before it goes mainstream.

Right now, the jump from USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) to USB4 (and TB 3/4 equivalents) is getting cheaper, but still costs. You’ll pay US$46 for the cheapest USB4 M.2 enclosures right now (more like US$75 and up for other options). That’s double the cost — or more — of USB 3.2 Gen 1 devices (UASP: see below). Cables cost US$2 to $10 more for faster varieties, which isn’t too punitive. You can’t take advantage of anything faster than Gen 3 NVMes. Thus, you can buy 1 TB for US$55-80, and 2 TB for US$93-130 or so.

The “big spring” comes from the cost of either buying (for laptops and so forth) or installing (for desktops with open PCIe slots, and ASUS is the only vendor I can find who makes one for US$126) to gain a USB4 40 Gbps port to plug into. My testing so far shows this DOES make a difference, and often offers better performance than older and rarer Thunderbolt 3 or 4 capable USB-C ports.

For Me, Backup Is the Killer App

I’m always messing with PCs, so I need to back up frequently in case I shoot myself in the foot and have to replace a mangled installation. It happens to me at least 1-2 times a week in my testing and research, so this is no joke. I find the cost of USB4 external storage worthwhile because it drops the time to make a complete image backup into the 2-4 minute range. It takes anywhere from 7-24 minutes to back up to UASP-capable external storage. This equates to USB 3.2 Gen 2 10 Gbps capability. It shows up with max read/write speeds in Cystaldiskmark in a range from 1000-1100 MBps.

If you look at the lead-in graphic, which comes from NirSoft’s USBdeview, you can see it references the UASPStore.sys driver and service. I’ve actually found this to be a clearer way to recognize when a USB 3.x port can provide somewhat higher speeds. If your USB 3.x ports are older (and slower) they’ll usually show a USBstor.sys driver instead (and max speeds in CrystalDiskMark in the 400-500 MBps range).

You pays your money, and you takes your chances. That’s how things go with external USB-attached Windows storage — and much else in life!

 

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Restored P16 Needs PowerShell Catch-up

Here’s something I’d never noticed before. If you’ve read yesterday’s blog post, you already know I ended up restoring the ThinkPad P16 yesterday after ascertaining Windows 11 backup fails to deposit a list of removed applications following “Reset this PC.” What I didn’t know then, but I know now, is that the restored P16 needs PowerShell catch-up to finish the job. Let me explain…

Why Say: Restored P16 Needs PowerShell Catch-up?

Imagine my surprise when running PowerShell on the restored P16 this morning, to see version 5.1 come up as the default. Then, imagine my further surprise to observe:

  • No version 7.4.5 present on the install
  • Windows Terminal NOT selected as default terminal app
  • No OhMyPosh present to gussy up the WinTerm UI
  • No other PS customizations present: e.g. WinFetch (as shown in the lead-in graphic to give PS something to display)

All this is, of course, easily fixed. And it took me less than 5 minutes to take care of all this stuff. But I learned a valuable lesson, one that I’ll take to heart going forward. It is: even an incredibly fast and convenient image restore using Macrium Reflect doesn’t completely restore absolutely everything. When invoked as a cure-all or a way to recover from a (failed) experiment, there’s still some clean-up needed.

Plus çe Change

I have to observe in this context that the same is true for an in-place repair install (aka IPRI). Once it’s done, one must re-set File Explorer Options and a few other odds’n’ends that the Windows Installer resets during its OS replacement operations. The more things change, the more they stay the same!

Here in Windows-World, it’s always something. Today, it’s understanding that an image restore may not completely put PowerShell back where it came from. I wonder: what will it be tomorrow?

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Windows 11 Backup Request

I have a modest request to make of Microsoft, where Windows 11 is concerned. Its new-to-11 Windows Backup facility uses Reset this PC as the basis for a new Windows image. It then rejiggers the Start Menu to show you which apps and applications need to be reinstalled. Hence my Windows 11 backup request. I see no file on the desktop or in the User’s folder hierarchy somewhere that lists  “missing” stuff.

What About My Windows 11 Backup Request?

According to the Answers.Microsoft.com something like this may be available in a file named removedapps.html. Or  perhaps “Removed apps.html” (with an internal space). If so, one could parse this data in PowerShell. Then, WinGet could reinstall most such things. (WinGet says it knows about 6,575 packages as I write this blog via (Winget search –source winget “”).count  .)

I’ve just made a Macrium Reflect image backup of a test PC, and I’m now going to restore that PC using Windows Backup. I’ll see if an html file shows up in the desktop (or somewhere else: e.g. windows.old) afterward. Let’s see…

Further Ruminations on Removed Apps

Turns out that when you go into this process, Reset this PC shows you the list of apps that need to be reinstalled. It also states “This list of apps will be saved to the desktop after reset.” That should do it.

List shows first 11 of 26 items, but does NOT allow text copy.

Just for safety’s sake, I screen-grabbed all items since this window doesn’t support text grab of the list contents. Good thing I did: when the machine booted, I could not find a file anywhere on the system that matched the string search “remo*app*.html” anywhere. Just for grins I also searched on *.html to look for all files dated today (September 9). Nothing relevant to removed apps there, either.

When in Doubt, Restore the Macrium Image

I eventually got back to where I started by disabling secure boot, booting into the Macrium Rescue media, then restoring the backup I made just before starting down this path.  Note: my PC wouldn’t boot from Macrium Rescue media unless I undid secure boot. Hey MS! Please fix this apps list issue: it makes Windows 11 Backup much less attractive or workable the way things currently stand.

The eventual part came from having to figure out I needed to turn off Device Guard before Secure Boot could itself be turned off. Then I had to steer around BitLocker stuff (a key is necessary before you can read an encrypted drive like the P16’s: I didn’t care because I was going to rewrite the whole shebang anyway). Then I had to wait for the backup to complete, go back and turn Secure Boot and Device Guard back on, enter the recovery key, and resume. Sheesh! A lot of time and effort to find out if Windows 11 Backup writes an app list to the desktop (or elsewhere). Too bad it does not…as far as I can tell.

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Fast UFDs Need Fast USB Ports

I just learned something amazing. I’ve long known that performance depends greatly on USB port selection. Indeed I posted about this nearly two years ago to the day: USB-C Port Choice Really Matters. Amusingly, it wasn’t until this morning that I figured out this caution applies to USB-A ports as well. Indeed, fast UFDs need fast USB ports for them to deliver their fullest capabilities. The speed difference is shocking, too: more than 20X faster for large read/writes; 2-10X faster for small ones. Let me show you…

CDM Shows That Fast UFDs Need Fast USB Ports

Check out the lead-in graphic at right. It shows CystalDiskMark (CDM) results for the same Kingston Data Traveler Max 256GB UFD I just had delivered from Amazon yesterday. It’s rated at 1,000 MB/s read, and 900 MB/s write on that purchase page. As you can see, CDM reports better numbers than those for queue depth of 8 on a 1 GiB object, and somewhat less for a queue depth of 1.

What’s fascinating, however, is the results shown on the left. These popped up in a pretty new ThinkPad T14s Gen6 Copilot+ PC I received from Lenovo last month. As the user manual confirms, both of its USB-A connectors top out at 5 Gbps, which makes them plain-vanilla USB 3.0 (aka USB 3.2 Gen1). As you can see given that I’m testing the same device in two different USB-A ports, the difference is down to the port. And that difference is MAJOR!

Here’s a Potential Workaround

You can purchase a dongle/adapter that is female USB-A on one side, and male USB-C on the other. It will let you plug a fast USB-A UFD into a presumably faster USB-C port. I bought a 2-pack of these from Amazon back in 2021. You can see there’s some pass-through loss (compare upper right results, and you’ll see what I mean) when taking this approach. But gosh! It’s still MUCH faster than a 5Gpbs connection. ‘Nuff said.

If you buy a fast UFD and your laptop or PC has only 5 Gbps USB-A ports, spend the extra $5-6 that a USB-A to USB-C adapter will cost. You’ll get a major performance boost as a result, even if it’s not as good as a native 10 Gbps USB-A port. Cheers!

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Windows App Will Replace Remote Desktop

I’m finally starting to get some clarity on the emerging Windows App, now out in preview. That clarity comes courtesy of a nice story from Martin Brinkmann at gHacks entitled “The Windows Windows app is real — replacing remote desktop app.” But I’ve got a problem with this tool –identical to the problems I had with the Teams (Work or school) version. I don’t have a qualifying MSA among the half-dozen or so I have set up. So, even though the Windows App will replace Remote Desktop, I’m still unable to use it. Sigh.

How Soon the Windows App Will Replace Remote Desktop?

Having been through this with Teams earlier this year, I  imagine Windows App will follow a similar trajectory. MS must eventually loosen its exclusive requirement for an Entra related MSA. Why say this? Because of 2 inescapable facts:

  1. The population of personal MSAs dwarfs that for the other kind
  2. Unless MS adds personal MSAs, it can’t replace Remote Desktop

All this said, the Windows App is now available in preview form. MS has various Learn assets for the program but none of them provides information about timing just yet. The best place to start is with What is Windows App? It leads to other useful info, too. My best guess is that this will be another element that distinguishes the 24H2 Windows 11 release from its predecessors.

Finding the Windows App…

Because “Windows app” is a generic term, and “Windows App” is the name of an MS Store object, some sleight of hand is needed to run it down. Best to search the store with “Windows App” (including caps) enclosed in quotes.

According to the MS Learn article Link to your app, you can synthesize the Store URL for an app by appending its Id string to this base string:

https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/

WinGet will happily provide that ID using either its list or show capabilities. Here again, I had to enclose “Windows App” in quotes to make this work, to wit:

As you can see, WinGet says the ID = 9N1F85V9T8BN, so that URL should be https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/9N1F85V9T8BN. Let’s see…

Works! Now, all I have to do is get a “real” Work or school MSA so I can use the gosh-darned thing. But that’s another kettle of fish entirely, here in Windows-World. Stay tuned.

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

WinGet Skips Edge Update

Just last week, I blogged about a Clean Chrome Winget Update. I just observed something in the same vein for Edge. Check out the lead-in graphic: you can see that WinGet finds 3 items in need of update, but only handles two of them. The third item is Edge which WinGet omits because that browser was open on that PC. Hence my assertion that WinGet skips Edge update, — at least, when Edge is open at the time.

What to Do When WinGet Skips Edge Update

You can do one of two things:
1. Close Edge and run WinGet upgrade again.
2. Navigate into Help and feedback > About and run the built-in Edge updater.
Either one works. As you can see in the next screencap, I did the latter and it worked like a charm (it shows the update complete, just prior to clicking the Restart button that puts the new version to work).

Edge uses “Restart” to preserve existing open tabs and contents.

As always, WinGet proceeds with caution doing updates (or making changes of any kind) when targeted apps or applications are running. This prevents possible loss of user data, including unsaved input or work. In general, I take this as an untarnished positive, because it shows how WinGet bends over backwards to invoke and follow a kind of digital Hippocratic oath. First and foremost, that involves taking no action that might result in data loss (“do no harm”). Good stuff!

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Early 24H2 Update Attempt Fails

When I read this morning on NeoWin that KB5039239 would update 23H2 Windows 11 to 24H2, I had to give it a try. So I visited the Microsoft Update Catalog and grabbed the x64 version to attempt an install on my Lenovo ThinkPad P16 Mobile Workstation. No dice. Indeed, this early 24H2 update attempt fails on that laptop, as you can see in the lead-in graphic. The Windows Update Standalone Installer informs me that “the update is not applicable to your computer.”

Why the Early 24H2 Update Attempt Fails

The NeoWin story specifically cites to a non-Copilot AMD PC receiving the update via WU, complete with Update History screencaps to show it downloaded and applied. Thus, I can only speculate that KB5039239 is still missing some support infrastructure for Intel CPUs in general (or this Alder Lake i9-12950HX CPU in particular).

Whatever the case my be with this CU, something about it gets picked up as “not applicable” for this test rig. Last May, I blogged about a way to use the 24H2 ISO to run an in-place repair install as workaround to upgrade 23H2 PCs to 24H2. It worked back then, and I’m pretty sure it still works now.

All this said, I’m not sure why the afore-cited CU doesn’t cut the mustard on my P16, but it’s just one of those interesting things about Windows. If I truly wanted to upgrade this machine to 24H2, I could get there from here. But I really just wanted to see if the approach described in the Neowin story works on the P16. It doesn’t, but I will keep my eyes peeled for something similar from WU soon, and see if what else comes along for that ride changes things from “not applicable” to otherwise.

Stay tuned!

Facebooklinkedin
Facebooklinkedin

Author, Editor, Expert Witness