In this topic i NEVER posted 2/3 times in a row...

Just to point out, double/triple posts are against the rule. You should use the edit button in the future.

hounsell did someone make a patch for glass in 4074?

so Server is the platform were it's build on..

the different levels:

server = server (also in it SKU)
xp or any other OS = a OS based on the server platform but with another SKU (because it's not really meant to be a server )

Right?

Hounsell's point is that if the SKU is Pro or Home, it's classed as XP. All the server skus = server. I think (as a guess) the SKUs are defined in Pidgen.dll, although i'm probably wrong

I never saw me doing that?! Where's the error in my previous posts?

I edited it.


There's literally hundreds of them, all with differing styles. I personally recommend using Longhorn 08.



Windows XP - 5.1.2600.* (This is the XP Codebase)

Windows Server 2003 - 5.2.3790.* (This is the Server 2003 Codebase)

Reset build - 5.2.3790.1232 - Windows Server 2003, branded as Windows XP.

Windows XP x64 - 5.2.3790.* - Again, Server 2003, merely branded as Windows XP.

It's worth pointing out all codebases contain the full set of functionality. XP can become a Server (I tried this once, was kinda lol), and Server 2003 can become a client. An SKU is just a concept that defines what is allowed to be exposed by the OS. Professional, for example, is a client SKU, and as such, if the OS gets told by the licensing components that it's Professional, it will block such functionality as the DNS Server that's in a Server SKU.

In NT 5.x, it was actually mostly enforced by simply not including the files. In NT 6.x, since the reset, All Client SKUs ship with the full set of functionality and simply block/show them according to what the licensing system says the SKU has, and likewise for Server. Hence why upgrading SKUs is so easy in Vista and 7. It's a little more complex in that, but that's the basic idea. A codebase includes all functionality, the SKU is just a set of licensing restrictions that the OS enforces.

Thanks, I shall not do it again



Did you do that with TweakNT? I did and Windows crashed (all text was gone)


So, XP is something different as XP x64 (other kernel and based on Server 2003)

And the early Longhorn build says XP, because that was the only workstation version based on the Server code in that time?!

I think it's more of a case that Microsoft likes to use the latest code available for any new project they start.

That's what it mean to say, but because the last code was made as xp, it says xp... - problem solved

TweakNT only changes text and images. it doesn't make real conversions, which is what i believe Hounsell did.

With TweakNT you can change the SKU, that's what I did. I changed from Home edition to server and it crashed...

no, you don't change the SKU, read the [censored] readme, it says it only changes text and images to look like another SKU. There is no other effect.

I know it doesn't install anything, but it makes Windows thinking it's another SKU, right?

yep. that's why it sometimes won't boot.

Yeh, it does change the SKU. Like I said, in NT 5.x, it'd only ship with the components for that SKU on the installation media, but you could hack in the server stuff to XP for example using server builds from the same approximate time as XP RTM and modifying INF files.

This is all too confusing.. Longhorn was built on Server 2003, so was XP, and Longhorn was going to be Vista? I thought Longhorn was going to be it's own OS, I guess that explains 'Codename' Longhorn.

iirc the post-reset was codenamed Longhorn Omega-13... And that becamse Vista, so the pre-reset Longhorn was canceled? i'm confused too...

Before the reset the OS was named Longhorn (partly based on Server RC), after the reset the renamed it to Longhorn Omega-13 (based on server 2003 - but the SKU was still the one from xp = very confusing-). Later that Longhorn Omega-13 was renamed to Vista (as it now is)

some info: http://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.p ... s:Longhorn

EDIT: after which build was the project reseted?

Answer: 4093(4093.main.040819-1215) although there might be a 4094 build. On the same day 3790.1232(3790.1232.winmain.040819-1629) build is out.

The OS before the reset is loosely based off Server 2003 RC-era code. At the reset, they started from scratch with what was then the latest Server 2003 code - which was roughly an SP1 RC build.

So on the same day, they had something new (based on server)? Why did the build number dropped, instead of going up?

So, that they hadn't to implement all the changes afterwards...

EDIT: I did it again! DOUBLE POST!! sry all

Because they only compiled the latest Server 2003 codebase with a Longhorn EULA.

They just started using the build numbers of Server 2003? That explains all..

EDIT: the ultimate proof (Windows Server 2003 - build 3790, but still branded as Win XP Pro)
http://www.betaarchive.com/screenshots/ ... tup_64.PNG