Why is this not a good idea?
If a driver is signed then this flag is ignored.
If a driver in unsinged then you would get a popup during your unattended installation if the driver was not integrated with the /ForceUnsigned flag
Granted if you have 1 or 2 of these then its not a problem.But lets talk when you have 60+ pupups during install and you have to manually accept them before install continues.This used to be a major problem for me during the Vista era because i didnt know about the flag.But still even 1 of these popups would halt the unattended install.
Tomorrow, like a lot of other things, people are going to disagree on these types of checks. I think unsigned drivers are not a good idea. The signing was put in by MS to offer some protection against problems. Some people turn off SFC and DEP, but that sounds dangerous to me. I understand your many pop-up during install concern and would avoid that with the application of /ForceUnsigned switch as needed, not on all drivers. Only one of my 8 drivers is unsigned. I am also leaning on the RAID vendor to provide a signed driver. I suspect RT7Lite turns off SFC and sets the Uxtheme patch, but have not seen this spelled out and don't see the options anywhere. Options are provided in nLite, what I am used to using. Thanks for your reply. Enjoy, John.
Signed driver does not automatically mean it's of higher quality than the unsigned one.I've had problems with WHQL drivers whereas the BETA driver have not exhibited the same problem.And sometimes the WHQL is 1:1 with BETA exept it has digital MS certificate.No other differences at all.
I turn off DEP too.It causes instability with Firefox and some other programs and sometimes prevents programs from running normally.Besides its not much help against viruses etc.For that everyone uses AV anyway.
Besides i have some hardware that is simply too old and naturally doesent have WHQL drivers.So i either disable checks or live with unusable piece of hardware?.I think i rather do the first.