Windows 10 major build shifted to 10.0

[Zheng He]

http://www.ithome.com/html/win10/113790.htm

ITHome reported that Windows 10 major build has shifted to 10.0, and they post some screenchots of "10.0.9888.0".



Seems interesting...
Edit: Someone in MSHK proved this.

[Wheatley]

[16:00:46] <Wheatley> hello compatibility problems

Sums it up pretty well.

[hounsell]

Worst news ever.

I hope Nadella fires the entire Kernel department for this move.

(Actually, this is a sign he probably has already fired the department and hired social media hashtag-friendly dipshits in their place)

9891 is still 6.4 for whatever, maybe a temporary revert because the terrible idea broke everything.

[The Distractor]

Frankly, I believe this is a purely visual change. Especially because buildfeed shows 6.4.9891.0.fbl_release... Also because I don't see any file version numbers in those screenshots.

Like hounsell said, it may have been done, and then reverted, because lots of compatibility problems.

edit: Given that 6.4.9888 of other fbls exist, perhaps one person (high up?) in fbl_release was responsible for this. Which would explain the quick revert. Probably a social media hashtag friendly "something", like hounsell said.

[hounsell]

We've seen a quiet spell though at BuildFeed though, and we now think it might be do to with the fact internal builds are now mostly 10.0.x and are therefore not offered as updates to 6.4.x builds?

[The Distractor]

We've seen a quiet spell though at BuildFeed though, and we now think it might be do to with the fact internal builds are now mostly 10.0.x and are therefore not offered as updates to 6.4.x builds?

...that's true. Perhaps you could run a 6.4 build under a kernel debugger and change NtMajorVersion/NtMinorVersion and see what offered esds you get?

[Zheng He]

Frankly, I believe this is a purely visual change. Especially because buildfeed shows 6.4.9891.0.fbl_release... Also because I don't see any file version numbers in those screenshots.

Like hounsell said, it may have been done, and then reverted, because lots of compatibility problems.

edit: Given that 6.4.9888 of other fbls exist, perhaps one person (high up?) in fbl_release was responsible for this. Which would explain the quick revert. Probably a social media hashtag friendly "something", like hounsell said.

Now BuildFeed shows "10.0".

[jagotu]

Oh man, wtf...

I hope this isn't real news or that it gets reverted.

Jumping 6 3 (shouldn't count on a train) majors at a time. Gg Microsoft.

[AlphaBeta]

Oh man, wtf...

I hope this isn't real news or that it gets reverted.

Jumping 6 majors at a time. Gg Microsoft.

*3

They skipped 7.x, 8.x and 9.x.

[The Distractor]

Oh man, wtf...

I hope this isn't real news or that it gets reverted.

Jumping 6 majors at a time. Gg Microsoft.

Offtopic Comment

>tfw your signature makes even more sense

[ovctvct]

I wonder how will we get old and even Windows 8.1(my OS) apps to work in Windows 10... It was enough that they called it ''10'' not ''9'' as many expected, let alone to jump the kernel version to 10.0. For example, in 8.1 some Vista apps work because while it's 6.3, the major is still 6.x,while on 10 they will fail.

[AlphaBeta]

I wonder how will we get old and even Windows 8.1(my OS) apps to work in Windows 10... It was enough that they called it ''10'' not ''9'' as many expected, let alone to jump the kernel version to 10.0. For example, in 8.1 some Vista apps work because while it's 6.3, the major is still 6.x,while on 10 they will fail.

There is this magic feature called Compatibility Mode. Also, >using 7 year old apps in 2014.

[The Distractor]

I wonder how will we get old and even Windows 8.1(my OS) apps to work in Windows 10... It was enough that they called it ''10'' not ''9'' as many expected, let alone to jump the kernel version to 10.0. For example, in 8.1 some Vista apps work because while it's 6.3, the major is still 6.x,while on 10 they will fail.

Yes, we all know that changing the kernel number in the past caused compatibility problems...

(see: nt 6.0, windows 95 reporting itself as 3.95 to 16-bit apps, etc.)

[Battler]

Well before there's mass panic, first let's remember:
1. There wasn't much software breaking on NT 6.0. Drivers yes, but that should be blamed squarely on bad driver developers;
2. The old (now deprecated) version get API function most probably still returns NT 6.2, resulting in compatibility with old software that relies on that.

[The Distractor]

2. The old (now deprecated) version get API function most probably still returns NT 6.2, resulting in compatibility with old software that relies on that.

Ah yes. I forgot about that. Indeed, kernel32!GetVersionInfoEx does return NT 6.2 if the exe calling it doesn't have a manifest ensuring compatibility with later NT versions; if it does, it returns that NT version it's compatible with, if the current actual NT version is that version or greater.

ntdll!RtlGetVersion (the function that kernel32!GetVersionInfoEx calls), however, still returns the actual NT version number. And of course, that's the function that drivers use to get the version number. Thanks, bad driver developers!

[German]

I think, RTM release is Windows 10 10.00 build 10000

[madalin88]

I sure hope this is fake.

There is absolutely no logical reason to jump the NT kernel version from 6.4, all the way to 10.0

The name Windows 10 should be strictly commercial and should have nothing to do with the actual kernel version.

This would bring great incompatibility issues , plus there is no major modifications to the kernel code , to force this version jump.

[Archenemy]

Windows 10 has the kernel 6.4 so it is fake. Don't always trust whatever you see.

[InsertGoodNameHere]

Windows 10 has the kernel 6.4 so it is fake. Don't always trust whatever you see.

How do you know this? Do you work with Microsoft? You cannot confirm this. While kernel 10.0 is unlikely (and stupid), that does not mean it is fake.

[Archenemy]

Windows 10 has the kernel 6.4 so it is fake. Don't always trust whatever you see.

How do you know this? Do you work with Microsoft? You cannot confirm this. While kernel 10.0 is unlikely (and stupid), that does not mean it is fake.

Think about it, 6.4 is the kernel Microsoft is working with for windows 10 and if they had to jump from 6.4 they would go to 7.0 and no I don't work with Microsoft.

[AlphaBeta]

if they had to jump from 6.4 they would go to 7.0

Oh, how do you know? When they skipped Windows 9, why couldn't they jump to NT 10?

[InsertGoodNameHere]

Think about it

Same with you. MS don't HAVE to go to 7.0, do they?

[MrUTB]

6.4.9883.0.fbl_srv2_ci_mgmt_rel.141114-1100 like Public release according Buildfeed. What's going on?

[hounsell]

Read the "Source Details" section:
https://buildfeed.net/actions/info/679/

"Windows Management Framework 5.0 Preview November 2014"

[xelloss]

I'm surprised that nobody commented on the 2015 copyright.
Does it make sense to change the copyright year to 2015 when we are still in 2014?

Anyway I don't see any huge problem in going from 6.3 to 10.0. Actually, what I hate the most is when the commercial version number becomes different from the real version number.
And it's high time developers learned how to check for version compatibility.