BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 63d, 4h, 8m | CPU: 11% | MEM: 5240MB of 12070MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:31 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
Battler wrote:
Quote:
Sometimes it's better that members persist than accept a false premise. BA as a whole would do well to remember that.

Except in this case, the argument is over one file of a few kilobytes. You yourself said the file makes zero differences, so I can't see why it's so important to keep it in.


In this case, maybe. But this logic will doubtless apply itself to larger, more important cases. I've only bothered arguing it this far, because by the logic being presented for removing the file, it should be kept.

Still, fair enough. I see I'm not going to change anyone's minds now. If they haven't come round to my reasoning yet, they're not going to no matter what I say.

James wrote:
The bolded is definitely inappropriate and inflammatory, by using ad hominem allusion to certain events in the past, and for telling him he's "bitching" and has a "fetish". Knock it off.


I know the past is a dirty subject here on BA, but it's not a fallacy to suggest that because someone has acted in x manner in the past, that they probably will again. Only to assume that they *must* act the same and that they cannot change their behaviour. I did not claim that.

It is however, a fallacy to suggest that past has no bearing on current events whatsoever.

For what its worth, the bitching and fetish references were not aimed at battler. I know I've used them in conjunction with the name "battler" plenty of times in the past, but as you point out, past performance is no guarantee of current events. But you probably still don't like the references. It's probably only a matter of time before this is all staff-binned anyway and no-one will be able to read my eloquently stated arguments earlier in the thread.

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:38 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:28 am

Posts
483
Battler wrote:
hounsell wrote:
Sometimes it's better that members persist than accept a false premise. BA as a whole would do well to remember that.

Except in this case, the argument is over one file of a few kilobytes. You yourself said the file makes zero differences, so I can't see why it's so important to keep it in.


I think you're turning this around. What he's trying to say is that he thinks leaving the ISO out because of one file that's not 100% original is an exaggeration, especially since the rest of the ISO hasn't shown any further marks of tampering.

As for myself: I don't really mind. It would be nice to have a file that's 100% original, but this is still a dozen times better than nothing.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:43 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2016

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
- hounsell: I see your point in your last post and I basically agree. Of course it's reasonable to assume that because a person has behaved one way in the past, they might repeat it. It is up to that person to prove they will not repeat it. :p And yeah, there's absolutely no denying that I've been quite frankly an idiot in the past. Hereby I apologize to the whole community for that.

I also see why you fear the logic will apply itself to larger, more important cases. So all I can say is, save your breath for if and when that actually happens.

_________________
Join #softhistory @ RoL IRC, a nice community for true enthusiasts!
Anime channel: #doki-doki @ RoL IRC, Mibbit, KiwiIRC.
The 86Box help channel is #softhistory now!

Check out our SoftHistory Forum for quality discussion about older software.


Top  Profile  WWW  ICQ  YIM
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:47 pm 
Reply with quote
Staff
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:13 pm

Posts
2027

Location
United States

Favourite OS
MacOS 9.2.2
hounsell wrote:
Battler wrote:
Quote:
Sometimes it's better that members persist than accept a false premise. BA as a whole would do well to remember that.

Except in this case, the argument is over one file of a few kilobytes. You yourself said the file makes zero differences, so I can't see why it's so important to keep it in.


In this case, maybe. But this logic will doubtless apply itself to larger, more important cases. I've only bothered arguing it this far, because by the logic being presented for removing the file, it should be kept.

Still, fair enough. I see I'm not going to change anyone's minds now. If they haven't come round to my reasoning yet, they're not going to no matter what I say.

James wrote:
The bolded is definitely inappropriate and inflammatory, by using ad hominem allusion to certain events in the past, and for telling him he's "bitching" and has a "fetish". Knock it off.


I know the past is a dirty subject here on BA, but it's not a fallacy to suggest that because someone has acted in x manner in the past, that they probably will again. Only to assume that they *must* act the same and that they cannot change their behaviour. I did not claim that.

It is however, a fallacy to suggest that past has no bearing on current events whatsoever.

For what its worth, the bitching and fetish references were not aimed at battler. I know I've used them in conjunction with the name "battler" plenty of times in the past, but as you point out, past performance is no guarantee of current events. But you probably still don't like the references. It's probably only a matter of time before this is all staff-binned anyway and no-one will be able to read my eloquently stated arguments earlier in the thread.


I have no intentions of staff-binning it. ;)

As for the rest, I'm just stating that it's better not to say those kinds of things as they can be construed as a flame. You didn't get a full warning for it, so no big deal.

_________________
James *~*~* BA Moderator | Alternate History writer


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:58 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:58 pm

Posts
164

Location
microsoft land
I cant believe how much complaining has come up because of this release, everyone needs to take a chill pill. the release is stable, the file in question just tells it what image to apply... it does have a different time stamp compared to all other real iso's that have been released every other iso released all files have the same date and time stamps. removing this part of the file will not affect anything... only thing it would do now is ask what version of windows you would like to install... is this an issue? I have been testing this release it is really stable wouldn't surprise me if this was the last build before rtm. I will note that when trying to deploy from wds they must have changed something with the unattended installs as its broken.
included unattended info below.
Code:
  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
 <unattend xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:unattend">
 <settings pass="windowsPE">
 <component name="Microsoft-Windows-Setup" processorArchitecture="amd64" publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35" language="neutral" versionScope="nonSxS" xmlns:wcm="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WMIConfig/2002/State" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
 <WindowsDeploymentServices>
 <Login>
 <Credentials>
  <Domain>Domain.local</Domain>
  <Username>Username</Username>
  <Password>password</Password>
  </Credentials>
  </Login>
  </WindowsDeploymentServices>
  </component>
  </settings>
  </unattend>


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 7:03 pm 
Reply with quote
VIP
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:18 pm

Posts
769
I did a Windows 8.1 Pro Preview (b9431) x64 to build 9471 x64, it took 34 minutes on my old clunky test rig.
Windows old is 4.33 GB, I plan on dumping it once I find my notes on the steps.
My files were moved over but not my settings or installed applications.

Here is one of the install screens
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 7:07 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:14 pm

Posts
1241
Nice to see someone did an upgrade? Do you have any more shots of the process possibly?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 8:24 pm 
Reply with quote
VIP
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:18 pm

Posts
769
Lukas Marsik wrote:
Nice to see someone did an upgrade? Do you have any more shots of the process possibly?


Certainly, I took screen shots until the I hit the install button in the above one, it was (#5), below are the first 4.
Image

Image

Image

Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 8:25 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:14 pm

Posts
1241
Oh nice, thanks for sharing them :)


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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 © 2006-2020

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS