Comparing Rufus and Media Creation Tool offers different approaches to creating backups.
Comparing Rufus and Media Creation Tool offers different approaches to creating backups.
I previously crafted bootable Windows 10 USB drives using Rufus. It simplified generating multiple Windows 10 installers from a single ISO. But I became annoyed switching between MBR and GPT formats. I then attempted to make Windows 10 USBs with Microsoft’s media creation utility. Not only can these drives run Windows 10 on both MBR and GPT, but there’s another surprising aspect: disk usage. When installing via Rufus, the drive fills the entire storage space. With Microsoft’s tool, the utilization is significantly lower, leading to a more functional system. I once believed Windows couldn’t efficiently use hard drives, but this discovery changed my perspective. Anyone know what’s happening or if this has been seen before?
The distinction lies in Rufus being designed for creating bootable USB drives, not limited to Windows. It supports multiple platforms like Linux, Solaris, and others, whereas Windows Media Creation Tool is exclusive to Windows.
Windows media production software, use Rufus for other tasks.