> is that they never explain WHY for each thing Hello, author here. I don't understand this criticism, because I specified in the article exactly why I was us

> is that they never explain WHY for each thing Hello, author here. I don't understand this criticism, because I specified in the article exactly why I was using this command, for this use case. I am setting up a computer specifically for CAD and CAM software, and it serves no other purpose - all I want it to do is run my industrial applications, and that's it, anything else is bloat to me. I don't advise everyone use it for every computer, but rather that it works for me very well when setting up PCs for industrial settings. As for the VCLibs, and .NET Native, they can be reinstalled afterwards from an Appx package, so if it ever became an issue, it's easier for me to nuke and add back, but that's just my opinion. Both, however, are libraries for running applications, not security updates, which are left intact by this method as this does not remove or affect Windows Defender or Windows Update. Therefore, if my CAD software doesn't need VCLibs or .NET Native to function, I don't have any loss in security - just in the number of apps I can run. > Multiple of them make Windows objectively less secure. I wrote this article because it does not mess with Windows Update, or run any random de-bloating scripts from the internet. For many people, not running a random internet script for de-bloating is a desirable attribute, and I don't see how this would make a PC less secure.