The time is set right. The license is in 30 days trial, I have original Windows 7 pro, but I might change to Ultimate.Cracked version of Windows? You should be installing the version that the machine came with unless you bought another license. If it's a cracked version security/certificate errors wouldn't surprise me.
Time set right in the bottom right? This is probably it.
ultimate is not faster or better in anyones estimation.you are using a cracked version of windows period.if you cant go to a legitimate version of windows then i guess linux is all you have then.good luck.I tried everything you said.
I installed Ultimate got this error, installed home basic got this error, installed Ultimate got this error. I also got the error in the picture down, this is why I am diging in the policies:
Edit:
I intended to put ultimate as it works better and faster is my impression. Also ultimate will be supported for longer I think and after it is not usable, I intend to pass on Linux, because Windows 10 is junk.
This is more of a problem than a solution.The ISO is downloaded from the internet (not Microsoft).
Sorry bro you're an idiot.Windows 10 is junk and no matter what they say (officially) it has very low performance and intentional bugs inside to make it slower and worst
When I installed the different versions to test them, Windows 7 ultimate was faster, not only that but is shows error messages and has functions not mentioned officially that make it better.
I guess that, the installation media can be corrupt, but I was hoping there is another reason.
EDIT:
The time and date are compared to: https://time.is/
The ISO is downloaded from the internet (not Microsoft).
Windows 10 is junk and no matter what they say (officially) it has very low performance and intentional bugs inside to make it slower and worst (example: the famous error on Windows 8/8.1 and 10 "watchdog timer violation"). This timer is designed to restart the processor in case the software of it is stuck (the most common and biggest reason for the programming of the processor to get stuck, not the OS, but the processor itself, is because microsoft put so many empty cycles inside in order to make it slower that they exceeded the miliseconds for the watchdog timer). Its worst that the same can be done with a single core processor and there is no new model in the past 30 years but that way they would not sell so much to the slaves. They make the processor wait (since Pentium and Windows 95) 95% of the time, among the other bus and RAM limitations inside. That is why the Russian dual core 500MHz processor is better than the Intel junk, which AMD strictly follows as well.
Once upon a time in Europe they tried the same approach, then they got killed an now a days its better.
Tccccccccc........ You are like blind people who prefer to stay chained in their cave then hear the truth. Whenever you hear "conspiracy theory" and oh..... that is impossible. However 1 of you tried with good, so I will tell you.
First: benchmarks only test a part of the performance factors, a good way to explain is that there are logical and functional mistakes, some of the functional mistakes can be caught by a benchmark but not all and certainly not the logical ones. Pretty much benchmarks are useless and show only a general overview with no proof of accuracy.
Second: I am the one who develops this hardware, and If I say its so, than for certain it is so!
Third: Their logic is like this, if we make it junk, it will be easy to sell them tomorrow new improvements which will be actually another shit parameter that does not help at all, but it is easy, we can always make up a new function or parameter which is worthless and have no real competition. Real competition is hard and we might loose. Also that way we get to control them. Also we make every new function paid (including the calculator which is ruined) and take away any freedom possible, if anyone wants more, he will have to pay, but the new one is junk of course and if he wants better he will have to pay more.
Example: 4 core processors, the same can be done with a single core if they remove the
Example: why did they not pass on 128 bit technology? This way they can sell you the new shit 64 bit technology, when everything is built for 32 bits, 32 bits does the same with less resources, but hey now you need 4 core processors and 8-16GB of RAM.......