Is there a Cougar download from the FTP? Would like to know. Will be very thankful for information.

If you mean the fake one, then no. It's fake. You can find it online.

If you mean the real one, it's on the FTP. Namely RC 5445.

I searched google for this interesting stuff, seems to be for no reason. Really nothing online or on Youtube.

Wait, are you talking about the one that was suppose to be before Chicago or SBS 2008?

I mean, i would like to get builds before the build 56, that means the builds which where named Cougar, not Chicago.

well there's a fake one labeled 28, there's also a SUPPOSED real one (still unconfirmed) with the same build number and with a screenshot from Battler (formely OSBrasilo)

They are fake.
They aren't on the FTP.

TheCollector1988, yes, i wanted some older builds just like the build 28.

Let's not jump onto the inanely unintellectual bandwagon that there is no Cougar related to Chicago. There is evidence that "Cougar" existed by viewing the ASCII contents of a certain file in (Chicago 56?). However as to knowing if it was a component or an entire version of Windows or as to what it is at all is entirely speculation and said topic should be left alone as per the rules as well (Not trying to backseat moderate...)


- You may not make any posts regarding the legitimacy of any build of Windows codenamed "Chicago", "Neptune", "Nashville" and "Odyssey" because of ongoing conflicts regarding the source of binary builds and information causing recurring problems on the forum.

this does apply since it's related highly to Chicago.

It's not an OS, but a part of Chicago...

we know that you want these older builds builds but other than the ones mentioned above there are no other leakes

Previously, there were many conflicts about Cougar which is claimed by some people to be early beta or part of Chicago. There also is someone who claimed to have various "Cougar" betas, but it's unconfirmed and sometimes believed to be a hoax.. There is no evidence for neither existance of "Cougar" nor authenticity of the *someone*'s Cougar beta builds. Back in the past, many people tried to get more facts and betas of old Chicago before build 56. However, they didn't gain much.. I wouldn't say that Chicago builds older than 56 don't exist at all though.. Sadly, it is very likely not to be able to gain them in my opinion..

Bzzt. Wrong. There is evidence of Cougar, again as to what exactly it is, who knows. Do I need to show you the proof myself? I also wouldn't jump to conclusions that earlier Chicagos don't exist, you shouldn't vouch for such without working for a certain company in Redmond, WA.

EDIT: Now I've got it:


Enough Said.

Where you got the "SETUP31" file in which the Cougar codename was discovered?

Where do you think I got it? Is it not obvious?

Chicago Build 56.

It is indeed there...

I seem to recall that the name 'Cougar' was reserved for the 32-bit kernel in 9x, hence why it shows up in Chicago. I'm not totally sure if I read this somewhere, or if I came to the conclusion after reading some of the PDF's in the Comes vs. Microsoft case :/

Codename Cougar = Small Business Server 2008 it's on the FTP i think

No he's referring to the old build not this one

the old Cougar build 28 is fake/unconfirmed the chance of finding it if it was real is very low also

Exactly. From what I've seen in those documents, Cougar is the name for the 32-bit protected-mode kernel which runs on top of Jaguar (for reference, see PX01285.pdf, PX01263.pdf, PX05516.pdf, PX01308.pdf, PX04268.pdf), which is the name for the Chicago kernel (real-mode DOS) (PX07661.pdf, PX01285.pdf, PX04268.pdf). If you don't want to look after the pdf files on your own, I have linked them here.

Yes, i see that build 28 is fake, in the list of Chicago builds, they say that build 32 is real. That's the build i want to find and test it out.

It's not even a confirmed build... Builds 40 and later are generally considered real, but before 40 are questionable. So even if you find it, it's 99% probability of a fake or mislabel. But anyway, good luck searching...

btw can betaguy224 be trusted? there are screenshots of 38 with him in the name and company name, also, 36 was shown by ProformanceX (not here on BA anymore) in 2009

IDK, but I am certain KenOath can be trusted (he has builds 40 & 99 IIRC).