Longhorn beta builds for daily usage.

[TheRifleman]

Hello all. I have a spare computer for daily usage. I am using Windows XP now. Also I like Vista's appearance. I tried Vista but it seems laggy. I want to try Longhorn beta builds.

1) Which beta build is stable?
2) Are beta builds usable as daily driver?

Thanks.

[computebrute]

I'm pretty sure we've already gone over this in an identical topic, if I can remember.

[Wheatley]

1) 3xxx and RC-era builds are usually okay
2) Don't even think about it

[yourepicfailure]

Since you like Vista's appearance, and are probably used to Xp, I'd recommend 5112 or maybe 5219. They have a form of DWM and appearance similar to Vista, but are set up much like Xp. Maybe a few other builds from the Beta1 to Beta2 forks.
1) Above recommended builds are rather stable, others aren't as much.
2) No, especially with many unfixed bugs and security holes.

[wasabilee]

well you need to be careful here
Beta 2 were already moreso hardware required much like final
think that 5259 was already in that circle

as for Alpha ones, aka pre-reset, 3718 is quite stable, 4029 ain't that bad also... and maybe 4053 ?

[JimOlive]

I don't recommend using Vista betas for normal use, but if you are, I would use, one of these:
3683
3706
4001
4074
5048
5112

[rafaelgs]

Build 5231 runs fine, and 5259 too, but, the system requirements are similar to RTM.

[Rezachkata]

1. Not many of them as they are prototypes meant for testing purposes only.
2. Definitely not.

Can't you just patch your uxtheme.dll and install some kind of Vista visual style?

[ovctvct]

I don't recommend using Vista betas for normal use, but if you are, I would use, one of these:
3683
3706
4001
4074
5048
5112

Why 4074? There's a myth that 4074 is very stable, but it's not real, 5048 is 3 times faster.
And you missed 5219, which is better.
So, my list:
3683
3718
4053
5048
5219

[DiskingRound]

I don't really recommend using Longhorn as an everyday OS. It may look nice, but as usual, it's a beta, it is not a final version and it probably will contain bugs or security holes. Plus, it's based on beta code, Win2K3 5.2.3663 RC1.

[Melcher]

Just like everybody else in this topic I don't recommend you using a beta as everyday OS, but if it's a spare pc anyway I'd say: go for it! Though 4074 may not be stablest build, it IS the most feature packed pre-reset Longhorn build so you might want to give that a go. Otherwise you could have a look at 3718 and/or 4033. Similar to 4074, but more stable is 4053.

[yourepicfailure]

Just like everybody else in this topic I don't recommend you using a beta as everyday OS, but if it's a spare pc anyway I'd say: go for it! Though 4074 may not be stablest build, it IS the most feature packed pre-reset Longhorn build so you might want to give that a go. Otherwise you could have a look at 3718 and/or 4033. Similar to 4074, but more stable is 4053.

But 4053 does have a User accounts glitch and an IE glitch. But I doubt he'll be using that ancient IE.

[AlexN]

5048 for sure. VERY stable, bit doesn't like a lot of drivers and program compatibility is pretty bad, but can be worked around

[kenzorio]

Somewhat off-topic, but has anyone here played with the NGSCB stuff in the Longhorn builds? Which Longhorn release would be best for doing experimentation on this? While NGSCB was ultimately pulled I'm fairly sure there were some sort of functionality in some of the builds, including the ability to write the trusted agents that would execute in the secure side.

[beta.a.brian]

I recommend using build 3706.I successfully installed Opera 12.02 along with sound and video drivers.