[OFFER] Windows XP Build 2531 OSBA Restored ISO

[coltonspleen]

OSBA had restored the ISO of this build to pretty damn well near it's original state. The only problem was that the build was so modified that the code that applied the Pro wallpaper doesn't work correctly. This is being offered as I do not know if the BA FTP has the restored ISO or not, but remember folks, this is as mint as it's gonna get (even timebomb (and maybe activation, although I'm unsure. Somebody please check) has been reinstated).
Here's the link to the thread of such ISO: http://www.osbetaarchive.net/topic/156- ... tored-iso/
I believe gus33000 had started the original post, so ask him if you wanna know how he (and I believe Lukas) got this build restored to pretty much how it was compiled at the M$ buildlab. And let me know if this ISO is already on the BA FTP.

[mrpijey]

\(Beta) Operating Systems\PC\Microsoft Windows XP (''Whistler'')\5.1.2531.0\5.1.2531.0.xpclient.010730-1640_x86fre_client-professional_retail_en-us

?

[coltonspleen]

It would be best to check by downloading the iso and installing it to check and see which ISO it is. If it doesn't show the evaluation text upon starting setup, it's the modified one. If it does, it's the restored ISO.

[mrpijey]

Was it restored because Microsoft sent out a shoddy ISO, or because the leak ISO was broken?

[oscareczek]

The leak iso (currently on FTP) was highly modified, it's not MS's fault.

[coltonspleen]

oscareczek's correct. It was indeed heavily modified by the original leaker. This ISO undoes the modifications made to this build by said leaker to ensure historical accuracy to the original build whenever (and wherever) possible. Thus that is why I offered it here, in this very thread.

[mrpijey]

So which ISO is most correct to the original one by MS? Ours or the OSBA one, and what evidence are there for either?

[oscareczek]

OSBA, because that already on FTP has unofficial wallpapers added (there's a Simpsons one, c'mon, they wouldn't get a licence for just a one bad-looking wallpaper), changed colors of cmd which hasn't been changed since first NT, deleted timebomb and pre-activated, there are two cpls added (something called DirectX≠dxdiag and TweakUI), also there's something with installer font. 2526: https://www.thecollectionbook.info/gall ... %20016.png
2531: https://www.thecollectionbook.info/gall ... %20016.png
2532: https://www.thecollectionbook.info/gall ... %20016.png

[mrpijey]

Very well, I've replaced the one on BA with the OSBA copy.

[coltonspleen]

OK. Thanks a bijillion mrpijey. The hunt is still on to find the original M$ ISO, however. In the meantime, this will have to do.

[qazmko1029]

Very well, I've replaced the one on BA with the OSBA copy.

There's no doubt that the osba's "restored" 2531 looks more like the original but that's NOT the reason we replace the original leak, after all we can't be sure if any of the modifications(label, file operations) were set definitely the same with the real build in the MS internal network, not to mention the "restored" one has a problem(come on, ignore this if you really believe it were a mistake in coding). What's more there's no critical issue in the original leak and you promised not to accept frankenbuild in another post. No second rule for different things can we?

[oscareczek]

Frankenbuild means there are files from multiple builds. There aren't any files from other builds than 2531 in this iso.

[coltonspleen]

Very well, I've replaced the one on BA with the OSBA copy.

There's no doubt that the osba's "restored" 2531 looks more like the original but that's NOT the reason we replace the original leak, after all we can't be sure if any of the modifications(label, file operations) were set definitely the same with the real build in the MS internal network, not to mention the "restored" one has a problem(come on, ignore this if you really believe it were a mistake in coding). What's more there's no critical issue in the original leak and you promised not to accept frankenbuild in another post. No second rule for different things can we?

Actually, there technically was an issue with it because it was heavily modified, cracked, & detimebombed, something the Whistler EULA does not allow (at least the cracked/detimebombed part of it anyway). The only way we could get a truly original copy to settle this madness once & for all would be to find the original ISO (or CD) from M$ themselves. And due to this ISO being the closest thing to the original we have at the moment, and the ISO that was on the FTP not being as close to the original as this ISO is, mrpijey had replaced it. And this is both my and his reason, right here.

[qazmko1029]

Actually, there technically was an issue with it because it was heavily modified, cracked, & detimebombed, something the Whistler EULA does not allow (at least the cracked/detimebombed part of it anyway). The only way we could get a truly original copy to settle this madness once & for all would be to find the original ISO (or CD) from M$ themselves. And due to this ISO being the closest thing to the original we have at the moment, and the ISO that was on the FTP not being as close to the original as this ISO is, mrpijey had replaced it. And this is both my and his reason, right here.

Though it has been replaced I'm still trying to express my feelings. We collect stuff not only by its "closed to original" but as well a reference for further learning. We need to preserve, but I suppose the original should be the leaks(from well-known groups or so) but not something we cannot handle like those "ms internals" out of our sights. For corrections, if there're strong points we can make an extra copy to preserve or even make a patch file. All we need to do are just making some patch files, in the case that only a few archives need patch like this, and adding a patch program. The question has stood for long time and these all depends on admin's mind so I'll respect their decision if they truly want this.

[mrpijey]

From BetaArchive's point of view we collect stuff only for one main reason: To preserve the software in its most original form. What you members do with it afterwards is all up to you. We present you the most original copy we can find for you to use and learn from. So no, we are not going to spend extra resources keeping track of and cataloging all kinds of off-source patches and junk. Whenever a more original copy comes along we replace the older one. That's how it works.