Build 21277 is out as an Optional Update

Correct.  There often is a gap between what should be & what is 😉 

I think we've both lived through the various phases.  And for a while there wasn't consistency in IBs with this nor are IB VMs, now, following settings, which, certainly isn't right AND are not blurred, aside from whatever the default is supposed to be.

Where it gets hazy is whether to call it an OS "bug" if only manifests itself in a vm environment.

Cheers,

Drew****

VM is supposed to emulate the real machine, if it does not behave according to settings, there is a bug somewhere with Hyper-V.

I've been running a VM shop for many years before Windows even existed.

Things are not much different.

To find the bugs caused by VM we had to compare the behavior of a native OS versus the behavior as a guest. 

The same logic still applies now. 😆

Note that there is a big difference with the mainframe environment licensing scheme.

The license is based on the model and power of the host machine and I could run as many guests as I wanted without having to pay a separate license for every guest VM  that I was running on the same host system. 

The fact that I need a separate license for testing insider builds in Hyper-V VM is really ridiculous.

Why should I pay a license for doing MS testing work ?

That is just one of the reasons why I refuse to play with Hyper-V VM, I still have plenty of old real machines sitting at home doing nothing I have no reason to use VM, not even to save electricity, given that I use solar panels.. 😎

Correct.  There often is a gap between what should be & what is 😉 

I think we've both lived through the various phases.  And for a while there wasn't consistency in IBs with this nor are IB VMs, now, following settings, which, certainly isn't right AND are not blurred, aside from whatever the default is supposed to be.

Where it gets hazy is whether to call it an OS "bug" if only manifests itself in a vm environment.

Cheers,

Drew****

Drew, 

I think the whole idea was to change the default to have a clear background on logon as a default instead of the opposite, but that was supposed to happen for both real machines or VM and for Hyper-V VM too.

When they made the first change attempt in that direction MS screwed up and it was only partially working as I described with build 20215,  then with subsequent builds they ended up reverting back to the original setting (With the default being blurred).

For some mysterious reason that did not happen with Hyper-V environment. 

The behavior should adhere to the settings in both real or virtual machines, but currently it is not.

Well, oh my you went through heaps to confirm (it would seem) what I'd been saying all the while. Wow 😲 

As to WHY it has started not long ago being focused regardless of settings, couldn't explain nor was I, really, trying to have one. It made no sense, so I'd left it at that.

Anyway, you've seen it for yourself, 1st-hand.

However, personally, having it NOT blurry is fine by me.  Whether I make it happen or it comes as a complete mystery, I'll take it 🤣

But, yes, 'tis this of what I spoke 😉

What is profoundly interesting is demonstrating that it is peculiar to a VM; that a normal machine has normal behaviour... that it is a (Hyper-V) VM thing & NOT an IB thing❗  Previously, could only say it was not a 20H2 thing. Ergo, this narrows the behaviour down, in a way.  Why it happens with a vm 🤷‍♂️ (Just) Good to know it is not a bug in the IB.

NB: I am aware of the short-comings of a vm.  I, have, also, done beta-testing of Windows OSs as dual-boot (triple briefly) & on thier own separate physical drives & other arrangements or devices. The first I worked on was Vista, then, 7, 8 & 10.  We are, also, having to trick Hyper-V VMs to do Enhanced View properly; didn't until fairly recently... fun with 'puters 😂 Occasionally I consider going back to putting the IB on its own dedicated physical drive, again. Main reason I've opted to stay with the vm is it's so damned easy to 'compare' IB things to the Host machine OS, basically, being able to see / work in either or both all basically at the same time; dual boot doesn't allow that. I have a PC & a laptop, but I don't want the laptop as an unsupported system, so, I won't flip that to an IB.  Not sure you care about my explaining but there you have it, anyway 😁

Cheers,

Drew

5. I hadn't given this much concern before this discussion.

Cheers,

Drew

On a bright note, if something is actually broken, it works in your favor of clear rather than stuck on blur.

That would be frustrating  :-)

@Johnny55, @Drew1903,

Just to confirm the different behavior I did an experiment myself.

I usually don't play with Hyper-V because MS wants yet a separate license even for testing the damn insider builds. 😜

Also Running on a Virtual machine is much slower that running on a real one.

Anyway I setup Hyper-V on one machine (MSI GT70-0NC host running 20H2 Build 19042.685) and did a clean install of 21277.1000 on a Virtual Machine guest. The behavior on Hyper-V is sure different than the behavior on a real machine, it looks like with Hyper-V, the VM guest is bypassing the policy and shows clear logon background regardless of the policy or the registry settings. 

The question I have now is:

Was this intentional or just a mistake, why is the Hyper-V guest not conforming to the policy and/or registry settings ?

The same clean install of 21277.1000 on a real machine behaves correctly according to the policy settings.

Hyper-V Clear background on logon regardless of the policy: