BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 72d, 19h, 28m | CPU: 9% | MEM: 6396MB of 12287MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 PostPost subject: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:28 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:17 am

Posts
3512

Location
Cologne, Germany

Favourite OS
10.0.9901
I just noticed that Longhorn build 4084 was on the FTP!! I just downloaded it. Has anyone tried it yet? Is it as stable as Longhorn 4074? Does it have DWM and does it work well?

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:09 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:31 am

Posts
1206

Favourite OS
whistler 2416
giantsteen wrote:
I just noticed that Longhorn build 4084 was on the FTP!! I just downloaded it.


Was it leaked recently or a long time ago? I thought we had 4084 for a while.

_________________
tonynoname.com


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:34 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:23 pm

Posts
315

Location
Neptune

Favourite OS
Windows 10
mrpijey added it to the FTP on sunday...


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:58 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:02 pm

Posts
5750
The recently added one is the actual OS, the previously available one was just the PE...


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:50 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:30 pm

Posts
1627
It's not a very special build and it has a "format C: /u /fs:ntfs" problem, because VSSAPI.dll (Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy Requestor/Writer Services API DLL) is missing.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:18 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Posts
1513
The build is so empty, just like 4083.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:14 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:50 pm

Posts
1738
A lot of people had it since long time. It was sure that i'd leak sometimes...


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:34 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:11 am

Posts
3494

Location
Italy

Favourite OS
Windows, OS/2, DOS
still this build is worth it :)

_________________
http://forum.softhistory.org


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:10 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:17 am

Posts
3512

Location
Cologne, Germany

Favourite OS
10.0.9901
But is it stable, and does DWM run? A thin client would be nice :)

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:40 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue May 03, 2011 4:23 pm

Posts
693

Favourite OS
NT 6.05.3718.0
anything after 4074 including 4074 is down the drain thing

_________________
Pat Bateman: I'm into murders and executions.
Les Grossman: Or you can grow a conscience in the next 5 minutes and see where that takes you.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:47 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Apr 26, 2011 2:15 pm

Posts
34

Location
Belgium

Favourite OS
Windows XP
Maybe I'm a noob but what's so special about this Longhorn, Ain't it something old?

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:54 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:50 pm

Posts
1738
MaSSaSLaYeR wrote:
Maybe I'm a noob but what's so special about this Longhorn, Ain't it something old?


Just for collection. {The community for beta collectors}


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:07 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Posts
1513
This build is past 7 years old now. It boils down to the point that the collectors are interested in older windows projects like Chicago and Longhorn while technology geeks like to have the newest builds.

It is unfortunate that most people who says the like OS betas actually meant they would like to have the newest build of Windows 8. Maybe to show off to friends and to make themselves feel proud.

For the minority of the people here at BA who actually collects OS betas, they would like to test them and to search for goodies to unlock. For the longhorn project, most that could be found are already unlocked. Probably the only thing I would like to see are Lab06_N DCE effects.

This build, 4084 is quite similar to 4083. Although there is the default tree wallpaper and a simple shell, there is nothing else to find in this build. Just another build for the collectors. Probably anything after this build would look like 4088 and 4093.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:05 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:48 am

Posts
608

Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, North America, Earth, Universe

Favourite OS
Windows 8 - 6.2.8102 - Pre-Beta
XDude wrote:
This build is past 7 years old now. It boils down to the point that the collectors are interested in older windows projects like Chicago and Longhorn while technology geeks like to have the newest builds.

I'm sorta like both; I like seeing the development of Windows 8, but I also do like early longhorn/vista builds (3863 - 4033). I would also like to see builds like 3551 or 3663 or 3670 (Mostly cause of the watermark (Windows XP *Version*) and how early they are). I would even like to see Windows Cougar/Chicago build 10 - 40. And what did beta versions of Windows 2.xx look like, and heck, what did beta versions of 3.0 look like?

_________________
6.1.7850 - September 22, 2010
6.2.7927 - Febuary 14, 2011
6.2.7955 - Febuary 28, 2011
6.2.7959 - March 7, 2011
6.2.7989 - April 21, 2011
6.2.8102 - August 30, 2011
Beta Escrow? 6.2.81xx - 12?/DD/2011
Beta 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012?
RC 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012
Final 6.2.8??? - MM/DD/201?


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:48 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:02 pm

Posts
5750
@Taylorover9000 there's no proof of Cougar builds - infact, that was the codename for Windows 95's kernel (IIRC). There also isn't any proof of any 2.X/3.0 betas.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:56 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:11 am

Posts
3494

Location
Italy

Favourite OS
Windows, OS/2, DOS
there may be Windows 2.x and 3.0 betas, who knows.

_________________
http://forum.softhistory.org


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 9:02 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:48 am

Posts
608

Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, North America, Earth, Universe

Favourite OS
Windows 8 - 6.2.8102 - Pre-Beta
TheCollector1988 wrote:
there may be Windows 2.x and 3.0 betas, who knows.

There, likly are 3.0 betas, 2.x, IDK.

_________________
6.1.7850 - September 22, 2010
6.2.7927 - Febuary 14, 2011
6.2.7955 - Febuary 28, 2011
6.2.7959 - March 7, 2011
6.2.7989 - April 21, 2011
6.2.8102 - August 30, 2011
Beta Escrow? 6.2.81xx - 12?/DD/2011
Beta 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012?
RC 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012
Final 6.2.8??? - MM/DD/201?


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:30 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:04 pm

Posts
2797

Favourite OS
Anything checked :P
I guess win 2.x betas should exist :p
Also, I found something in the anti-trust docs saying that the win 3.0 beta NDA was very strict and that people who signed the NDA couldn't even say that a product called Windows 3.0 was in development.
And yes, I have found other references to the existance of Windows 3.0 betas in the antitrust docs.

_________________
C H E C K E D . B U I L D S . A R E . A W E S O M E N E S S

Glitch City Laboratories ForumsSoftHistory Forumsirc.rol.im #softhistory,#galaxy

If you like my posts, donate me Dogecoin: DLnZV8DS3CaZmLKAVxL2aMijY2vUZeyjBi


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:42 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:33 pm

Posts
3899

Location
Where do you want to go today?

Favourite OS
All Microsoft operating systems!
Offtopic I know, but since it was other people of whom went offtopic first before me, I'll state the following:

I know that there were Windows 3.0 betas, since I have not only confirmed the existence of several through many publications during my work on the original August 18th, 2011 release of the Official Microsoft OS Checklist for The Beta Group and AbandoNet (the successor, codenamed the "Christmas Holiday Release", of which has been in development since early September, is set for release on November 28th this year), but I have also found people online of whom beta tested them.

Sadly, I am NOT in contact with them, at least not at the moment, for personal reasons (I will not be disclosing such here, except that for at least two, it has to do with personal actions in these people's lives of which I do not approve of in any way, shape, or form, and since it might appear as if I somehow condone or even endorse and/or support these people's actions, and since it might seem as if to even invite them here would be to show sympathy, if not even support for such actions, I would rather not risk it, at least for the sake of my own reputation).

If anyone wants, I might be able to give out at least two of the people of whom I've found online, of whom beta tested the Windows 3.0 builds, provided that they don't give it out publically without my permission, and provided that they will also not try to guess (at least in the presence of other people, including myself) the reasons for which I would rather not have the above mentioned people disclosed here.

That being said, if I could name my sources without risking my online reputation, I would have gladly done so, but for the sake of my above mentioned reputation, all of my sources will remain private unless and until I find one of which will not cause trouble for me here.

If anyone wants to discuss my sources for the Windows 3.0 builds with me, I would prefer it if they kept it out of the forums, since I would rather not start a flame war regarding it, especially since this topic is specifically about Longhorn Build 4084, and not about Windows 3.x in any sense of the word.

But, all in all, not only do I know very well that the Windows 3.0 pre-release builds did indeed exist, but also, why would (and really, how could) Microsoft not only make an entire product release, but also a milestone one at that, without even compiling any pre-release builds at all?

Also to note is Wes Cherry, of whom even wrote Solitaire for the beta releases of Windows 3.0, while that product was still in beta testing, and also certain magazines (Infoworld might have been one of them, but I'll have to check back) of which also received the pre-release builds of Windows 3.0.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:22 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:06 am

Posts
1070

Location
C:\WINDOWS\System32

Favourite OS
Windows 8.1 9600
WinPC wrote:
Offtopic I know, but since it was other people of whom went offtopic first before me, I'll state the following:

I know that there were Windows 3.0 betas, since I have not only confirmed the existence of several through many publications during my work on the original August 18th, 2011 release of the Official Microsoft OS Checklist for The Beta Group and AbandoNet (the successor, codenamed the "Christmas Holiday Release", of which has been in development since early September, is set for release on November 28th this year), but I have also found people online of whom beta tested them.

Sadly, I am NOT in contact with them, at least not at the moment, for personal reasons (I will not be disclosing such here, except that for at least two, it has to do with personal actions in these people's lives of which I do not approve of in any way, shape, or form, and since it might appear as if I somehow condone or even endorse and/or support these people's actions, and since it might seem as if to even invite them here would be to show sympathy, if not even support for such actions, I would rather not risk it, at least for the sake of my own reputation).

If anyone wants, I might be able to give out at least two of the people of whom I've found online, of whom beta tested the Windows 3.0 builds, provided that they don't give it out publically without my permission, and provided that they will also not try to guess (at least in the presence of other people, including myself) the reasons for which I would rather not have the above mentioned people disclosed here.

That being said, if I could name my sources without risking my online reputation, I would have gladly done so, but for the sake of my above mentioned reputation, all of my sources will remain private unless and until I find one of which will not cause trouble for me here.

If anyone wants to discuss my sources for the Windows 3.0 builds with me, I would prefer it if they kept it out of the forums, since I would rather not start a flame war regarding it, especially since this topic is specifically about Longhorn Build 4084, and not about Windows 3.x in any sense of the word.

But, all in all, not only do I know very well that the Windows 3.0 pre-release builds did indeed exist, but also, why would (and really, how could) Microsoft not only make an entire product release, but also a milestone one at that, without even compiling any pre-release builds at all?

Also to note is Wes Cherry, of whom even wrote Solitaire for the beta releases of Windows 3.0, while that product was still in beta testing, and also certain magazines (Infoworld might have been one of them, but I'll have to check back) of which also received the pre-release builds of Windows 3.0.

Did Windows 3.0 based on Windows 2.03? If so, can you send me the screenshots of it?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:23 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:02 pm

Posts
5750
It would sound more logical if it was based on 2.11, since it was released after 2.03. But anyway, I suggest we get back on-topic... ;)


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 9:38 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:48 am

Posts
608

Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, North America, Earth, Universe

Favourite OS
Windows 8 - 6.2.8102 - Pre-Beta
betascollector wrote:
*Snip*

Quote:
Did Windows 3.0 based on Windows 2.03? If so, can you send me the screenshots of it?

Offtopic Comment
Yes, that would be nice.

_________________
6.1.7850 - September 22, 2010
6.2.7927 - Febuary 14, 2011
6.2.7955 - Febuary 28, 2011
6.2.7959 - March 7, 2011
6.2.7989 - April 21, 2011
6.2.8102 - August 30, 2011
Beta Escrow? 6.2.81xx - 12?/DD/2011
Beta 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012?
RC 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012
Final 6.2.8??? - MM/DD/201?


Last edited by Taylorover9000 on Tue Nov 01, 2011 5:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 5:38 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:27 am

Posts
342

Favourite OS
6.00.5112
Offtopic Comment
Windows 3.0 developing started by mid of '88 or even earlier (according "Unauthorized Windows 95" by Andrew Schulman), so it couldn't be based on 2.11. Also, its binary code has references to early builds. And it was in /286 and /386 builds on the early stages, like 2.xx was.


Top  Profile  ICQ
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:00 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:48 am

Posts
608

Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, North America, Earth, Universe

Favourite OS
Windows 8 - 6.2.8102 - Pre-Beta
vizerous wrote:
Offtopic Comment
Windows 3.0 developing started by mid of '88 or even earlier (according "Unauthorized Windows 95" by Andrew Schulman), so it couldn't be based on 2.11. Also, its binary code has references to early builds. And it was in /286 and /386 builds on the early stages, like 2.xx was.

Offtopic Comment
Well, one way or another, I think we either need screenshots, and/or a LEAK! :) :) :) IDC (I don't care) if its early ('87 or '88), or late ('90), or mid ('88 or '89). I'd give him/you "points" for this. The more betas on :beta: archive, the better.

Edit: I made a *fake* concept image. How's this compare to the REAL betas?
Edit 2: I made a second one, EARLIER.
Image

Image

_________________
6.1.7850 - September 22, 2010
6.2.7927 - Febuary 14, 2011
6.2.7955 - Febuary 28, 2011
6.2.7959 - March 7, 2011
6.2.7989 - April 21, 2011
6.2.8102 - August 30, 2011
Beta Escrow? 6.2.81xx - 12?/DD/2011
Beta 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012?
RC 6.2.8xxx - MM/DD/2012
Final 6.2.8??? - MM/DD/201?


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows Longhorn 4084        Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:58 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:06 am

Posts
1070

Location
C:\WINDOWS\System32

Favourite OS
Windows 8.1 9600
Taylorover9000 wrote:
vizerous wrote:
Offtopic Comment
Windows 3.0 developing started by mid of '88 or even earlier (according "Unauthorized Windows 95" by Andrew Schulman), so it couldn't be based on 2.11. Also, its binary code has references to early builds. And it was in /286 and /386 builds on the early stages, like 2.xx was.

Offtopic Comment
Well, one way or another, I think we either need screenshots, and/or a LEAK! :) :) :) IDC (I don't care) if its early ('87 or '88), or late ('90), or mid ('88 or '89). I'd give him/you "points" for this. The more betas on :beta: archive, the better.

Edit: I made a *fake* concept image. How's this compare to the REAL betas?
Edit 2: I made a second one, EARLIER.
Image

Image

Awesome, but this is not the fake screenshot contest.
Let's get on topic right now.


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2019

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS