BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 66d, 11h, 22m | CPU: 22% | MEM: 5413MB of 12287MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 10:48 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:19 pm

Posts
1830

Location
shell32.dll
DeFacto wrote:
hounsell wrote:
Except in this case, can you actually prove that?

Sure, fix the headers. But mrpijey is also removing ei.cfg. There is no way to know that it shipped without ei.cfg, only that the ei.cfg on the ISO is not "original". Modifications are being done on an arbitrary basis, rather than based on cold hard evidence.


What I think is going on, is that he simply makes the changes he wants to, ignoring your rather accurate advice yet again...


That's the merpyj logic.

_________________
Windows Defender for great justice! Bugs are an international trading company. I need to defeat the anti-debugging and obfuscation methods. It wasn't for Intel's absurd ability to load in ie6. Why even waste time with people in an envelope?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2013 11:04 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2017

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
DeFacto wrote:
So, how come that 3.1.68 was deleted then? Why not reconstruct it and/or store it until a better version is found?

Meanwhile, 34e remains on the FTP.

Build 068 was deleted because there was no way of finding out what came from where, so no way to remove any files that shouldn't be there. Build 034e is still there because we know exactly what was modified in that one.
Also maybe mrpijey just wasn't aware that the Disk 2 of 034e wasn't original. Herein lies his original point - he doesn't know everything and needs member input to properly identify modifications in releases so he can remove them. And in this thread, people simply didn't appear to care about that, which is why he then talked about that.
Edit: There is also the fact the fixed Disk 2 of 034e is needed to install the Build in the first place. The ei.cfg file here isn't.

hounsell wrote:
Except in this case, can you actually prove that?

Sure, fix the headers. But mrpijey is also removing ei.cfg. There is no way to know that it shipped without ei.cfg, only that the ei.cfg on the ISO is not "original". Modifications are being done on an arbitrary basis, rather than based on cold hard evidence.

It's evident ei.cfg was at the very least modified due to the time-stamp. And there's no evidence either way for whether ei.cfg was originally present or absent. But since it's modified, removing it makes a copy which is less modified. And if an ei.cfg was originally present, it is already missing in the original modified ISO, since there is only a modified one there.
I see nothing arbitrary there - just striving to preserve only original files in the ISO.
And again, as per above, mrpijey doesn't know everything, we the members should give our own input on modifications too. We are a community and we should work together on things.

DeFacto wrote:
What I think is going on, is that he simply makes the changes he wants to, ignoring your rather accurate advice yet again...

Noone is ignoring anyone's advice here. It's just that the ei.cfg in this ISO is modified and we have no unmodified copy to go by, so even if ei.cfg is supposed to be there, we have none to put there, so he removes the modified one to keep only untouched files.

_________________
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: Mon Aug 12, 2013 11:40 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
Wheatley wrote:
DeFacto wrote:
hounsell wrote:
Except in this case, can you actually prove that?

Sure, fix the headers. But mrpijey is also removing ei.cfg. There is no way to know that it shipped without ei.cfg, only that the ei.cfg on the ISO is not "original". Modifications are being done on an arbitrary basis, rather than based on cold hard evidence.


What I think is going on, is that he simply makes the changes he wants to, ignoring your rather accurate advice yet again...


That's the merpyj logic.


That kind of thing needs to stop. Warned

_________________
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 1:46 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!
First of all, Battler, hounsell, and mrpijey are all correct on some level that this is simply a case that involves scientific evidence for what was originally present in the build itself, even if hounsell and mrpijjey had several (proper) disagreements over a few things, such as the presence of the EI.CFG file in the original copy and so on...

Now, personally, I believe that we should try to keep all builds as much as possible, of course I do - that's the whole purpose of this community by the way, to preserve anything that isn't otherwise widely available on the Internet. But at the same time, we are also here to keep all operating systems as original as possible, without any modifications whatsoever.

So basically, if it's possible, then we try to keep the most original copies available. For that, I agree completely. And in cases where an original isn't available, we still can make an effort to try to reconstruct each release as closely to the original as possible, again, using as much evidence to verify how Microsoft would have actually done it during the correct time period and such.

For all of you who are reading my post, although I've taken a bit of a vacation from it at the moment, I'm currently making an effort to test each operating system (Digital Research, IBM, and/or Microsoft that is) and every piece of software written for those operating systems in exact chronological order. And with that, I have once again tried to reconstruct each moment of software history as closely to how it occurred as possible. Not only that, but once I get back to it, I'll also try to work on similarly restoring just about everything that I come across in the process, and in exactly the same way that mrpijey would have done it.

Basically, what historians do, as Battler pointed out some time earlier. This is also not counting any of the "pseudo-scientists" (as Battler calls them) that as he points out, are only here to rewrite history according to their own agenda.

Because I feel that everything must be preserved to the maximum extent possible, including the most original copies of each release available. And mrpijey does also, with his excellent FTP archive. I mean, doesn't it make it more valuable that it has "X characteristics" that were included (or likely to have been included) in the original copy? It also makes it so that we are using the release itself in the way that it was specifically designed and intended. And there is always a lot more collector's value in the future.

Also, even at the strong risk of bordering on backseat moderating, you people, in my opinion, need to realize the fact that mrpijey was NOT saying that he wouldn't accept the build at all. Chances are, he is working on releasing it here for everyone. Just that the aim is always to have the most original copies of each release available, not just for collector's value, but also to reconstruct everything as close as possible to how it actually occurred. And again, this is no different to what historians do regarding each major moment in world history, by working to detail it as accurately as possible.

James, I am not doing this to backseat moderate at all. Infact, if anything, this post here is to show my support for the site and its actions. You and all of the other staff members have done an excellent job in keeping this site going, especially in the case of mrpijey's excellent FTP server. :)


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:11 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:57 am

Posts
429

Location
Greece

Favourite OS
Windows 10 LTSC x64
In my opinion if an original MS ISO isn't available we should keep the ISO intact just as it got released except if it is broken and can be fixed or if it contains cracks or anything like that; trying to make it look like an original isn't worth it. Just my opinion on the matter :mrgreen:


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 3:55 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!
Hackerpcs wrote:
In my opinion if an original MS ISO isn't available we should keep the ISO intact just as it got released except if it is broken and can be fixed or if it contains cracks or anything like that; trying to make it look like an original isn't worth it. Just my opinion on the matter :mrgreen:
As I said above, this is no different to what historians do in relation to reconstructing each event as closely to how it actually happened as possible. We may not ever be exactly 100% correct, but we can still at least try to make an effort.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 6:12 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:57 am

Posts
429

Location
Greece

Favourite OS
Windows 10 LTSC x64
WinPC wrote:
Hackerpcs wrote:
In my opinion if an original MS ISO isn't available we should keep the ISO intact just as it got released except if it is broken and can be fixed or if it contains cracks or anything like that; trying to make it look like an original isn't worth it. Just my opinion on the matter :mrgreen:
As I said above, this is no different to what historians do in relation to reconstructing each event as closely to how it actually happened as possible. We may not ever be exactly 100% correct, but we can still at least try to make an effort.

OK, this is your opinion that you wrote 2 posts above, there is no need to repeat it.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 6:25 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:28 pm

Posts
4268
Hackerpcs wrote:
In my opinion if an original MS ISO isn't available we should keep the ISO intact just as it got released except if it is broken and can be fixed or if it contains cracks or anything like that; trying to make it look like an original isn't worth it. Just my opinion on the matter :mrgreen:


That's what I was saying this whole time. There's no way you can know how it can be "more original", so better just leave it as is.

_________________
Longhorn Packet 1.21 - Solves most of the problems with Longhorn Setup
[GUIDE] How to dump clean/untouched images from CD discs
Longhorn Music Album (FLAC) | 523.31 MB | 17 tracks | Donators Discussion Forum


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 6:43 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:14 am

Posts
447

Location
Romania

Favourite OS
NT 10.0
@mrpijey As long as the ISO installs the unthatched OS build I want, it can have the Windows 95 Setup for all I care.
Not the ISO or setup process counts, but the actual product you install.
You use the ISO only once, when you install the OS, and the Setup process only takes a few minutes (not more then 5)... the OS is the one you test for months and months.

I am not saying that it won't be great to have a 100% legit ISO. Sure! But as long as the OS itself is legit , I don't care


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 8:11 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
Hackerpcs wrote:
In my opinion if an original MS ISO isn't available we should keep the ISO intact just as it got released except if it is broken and can be fixed or if it contains cracks or anything like that; trying to make it look like an original isn't worth it. Just my opinion on the matter :mrgreen:


Of course. It is "more original" when it's been through less hands and fewer whims trying to "correct" it. Unless there is a clear reason to change it, there's no point in screwing about.

It's absurd that we're even debating purity on a build with a changed ISO header and a different ei.cfg - which does nothing more than preselect an SKU. As I've said already, most MS releases come with an ei.cfg - removing one will be a bigger change than having a different one. There's nothing special about the contents of this ei.cfg, it's the same as countless others from over the years.

It was most likely done to make this a more usable leak - it probably had say, a different SKU or licensing option preselected. Not uncommon for a test build for close partners. They probably changed it to use the Pro/Retail setup, which is by far the more popular setup with the public, and is actually activateable with Preview keys.

_________________
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 9:32 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:08 pm

Posts
241

Location
North West England

Favourite OS
Windows 8.1 Pro Preview 6.3.9431
This leak performs stable.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Dragondemonlord on Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:44 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:36 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:08 pm

Posts
173

Location
Moon

Favourite OS
1976, 2285, 7004, 7082, 7989
I will try this build on VMware.
Dragondemonlord wrote:
Offtopic Comment
I quit

Offtopic Comment
Quiting what?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:38 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:03 pm

Posts
506

Location
Czechia

Favourite OS
Development Release #5
Windows 94 wrote:
I will try this build on VMware.
Dragondemonlord wrote:
Offtopic Comment
I quit

Offtopic Comment
Quiting what?

Offtopic Comment
Quitting Internet Explorer, of course

_________________
Windows TEN - Totally Erroneous Numbering
Always watching you...


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:39 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:08 pm

Posts
241

Location
North West England

Favourite OS
Windows 8.1 Pro Preview 6.3.9431
jagotu wrote:
Windows 94 wrote:
I will try this build on VMware.
Dragondemonlord wrote:
Offtopic Comment
I quit

Offtopic Comment
Quiting what?

Offtopic Comment
Quitting Internet Explorer, of course


That is correct

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:40 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:08 pm

Posts
173

Location
Moon

Favourite OS
1976, 2285, 7004, 7082, 7989
jagotu wrote:
Offtopic Comment
Quitting Internet Explorer, of course

Offtopic Comment
I never use Internet Explorer. :P


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:42 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:03 pm

Posts
506

Location
Czechia

Favourite OS
Development Release #5
Windows 94 wrote:
jagotu wrote:
Offtopic Comment
Quitting Internet Explorer, of course

Offtopic Comment
I never use Internet Explorer. :P

Offtopic Comment
Chrome 4ever!

_________________
Windows TEN - Totally Erroneous Numbering
Always watching you...


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:47 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:08 pm

Posts
173

Location
Moon

Favourite OS
1976, 2285, 7004, 7082, 7989
jagotu wrote:
Offtopic Comment
Chrome 4ever!

Offtopic Comment
Yes, I'm using Chrome. :D
Whoops, we gone offtopic.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 10:28 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:02 pm

Posts
5750
@Battler: so if what you're saying is true, then please enlighten me how can you know something is modified and not original, without knowing the differences between the modified copy and the original, and thus knowing exactly what part is modified? You can't make a claim, saying something is not original/unmodified, and then later say you don't know what's modified...

Or is it so hard to look at the files and give the info to mrpijey (he doesn't know everything, you know, so he relies on the info provided by other members)?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 11:59 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2017

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
- DeFacto: Differing file dates/times, an UltraISO header, the fact that file name appears in all caps while the rest of the file names don't, just to name three signs of modification. And you are mischaracterizing my claims - we know ei.cfg is modified, as per the signs I mentioned here, we just don't know what in it is changed from a possible original version of the file. Which is why the modified file is removed.

- hounsell: I'd like to note that all mrpijey is doing is attempt to remove any modified files from the ISO. Archaeologists also attempt to reconstruct historical artifacts as much as possible to their original form.

But in any case, this is a matter of opinions. You guys think one way, mrpijey another. It's evident he's not changing his mind no matter how much you guys insist. He's certainly noted your opinions but he so happens to not agree with them so he won't do things your way in this case. So I can't see what's the point in continuing to argue.

_________________
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 12:28 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:
- hounsell: I'd like to note that all mrpijey is doing is attempt to remove any modified files from the ISO. Archaeologists also attempt to reconstruct historical artifacts as much as possible to their original form.


They don't get an artefact and start knocking bits off because someone down the line because someone changed them slightly.

It's like an archaeologist finding an old jug and then knocking the handle off because someone later repaired it a few years down the line. Sure, it'd be nice to have an original, but we don't have that. Knocking the modified bits off doesn't help - a jug without a handle has less in common with the original than a jug with a repaired handle.

Your archaeologist analogy is a load of crap anyway. We're not archaeologists, we're beta collectors. This modification makes sod all difference, because there'll almost certainly be an original ISO with this ei.cfg anyway. Sure, this ISO is not *that* ISO. But it's a bit much to then make your first post in the topic bitching about how inobservant members are for not zealously satisfying your purity fetish. It's a leak, and all leaks are good.

And of course you'd rather everyone just fall in line. It's how you operated for years. Didn't accept any questioning of certain things you held to be true. Guess it's just as well some of us persisted in counteracting that misinformation. I don't recall receiving your thanks for my persistence in exposing the real truth.

Sometimes it's better that members persist than accept a false premise. BA as a whole would do well to remember that.

_________________
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 12:30 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:02 pm

Posts
5750
Battler wrote:
- DeFacto: Differing file dates/times, an UltraISO header, the fact that file name appears in all caps while the rest of the file names don't, just to name three signs of modification. And you are mischaracterizing my claims - we know ei.cfg is modified, as per the signs I mentioned here, we just don't know what in it is changed from a possible original version of the file. Which is why the modified file is removed.


I was talking about build 68, not 9741. You're avoiding the answer again...


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 1:39 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2017

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
- DeFacto: That 068 originally came from OSBG/EABG. I, with the help of the other people, restored it and released it onto OSBG/EABG. Then it made its way to BA eventually. But since by now I forgot what files exactly in the restored version came from where, and since some of the files provided by one of the other two people are likely to be dubious since the person who provided them did a whole lot of dubious things, I myself advised mrpijey it might be better to delete the Build from BA. And he did.

_________________
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 1:49 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
I'd advise everyone to keep a cool head, as it seems tempers are beginning to flare up, so I'd suggest that people exercise restraint when talking to one another.

hounsell wrote:
Battler wrote:
- hounsell: I'd like to note that all mrpijey is doing is attempt to remove any modified files from the ISO. Archaeologists also attempt to reconstruct historical artifacts as much as possible to their original form.


They don't get an artefact and start knocking bits off because someone down the line because someone changed them slightly.

It's like an archaeologist finding an old jug and then knocking the handle off because someone later repaired it a few years down the line. Sure, it'd be nice to have an original, but we don't have that. Knocking the modified bits off doesn't help - a jug without a handle has less in common with the original than a jug with a repaired handle.

Your archaeologist analogy is a load of crap anyway. We're not archaeologists, we're beta collectors. This modification makes sod all difference, because there'll almost certainly be an original ISO with this ei.cfg anyway. Sure, this ISO is not *that* ISO. But it's a bit much to then make your first post in the topic bitching about how inobservant members are for not zealously satisfying your purity fetish. It's a leak, and all leaks are good.

And of course you'd rather everyone just fall in line. It's how you operated for years. Didn't accept any questioning of certain things you held to be true. Guess it's just as well some of us persisted in counteracting that misinformation. I don't recall receiving your thanks for my persistence in exposing the real truth.

Sometimes it's better that members persist than accept a false premise. BA as a whole would do well to remember that.


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.

Dragondemonlord wrote:
jagotu wrote:
Windows 94 wrote:
I will try this build on VMware.
Dragondemonlord wrote:
Offtopic Comment
I quit

Offtopic Comment
Quiting what?

Offtopic Comment
Quitting Internet Explorer, of course


That is correct


All of the people involved in this lengthy quote pyramid -- Knock it off and get back to topic. Dragondemonlord, Windows 94 and jagotu: I'm talking to you.

_________________
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 1:58 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:08 pm

Posts
173

Location
Moon

Favourite OS
1976, 2285, 7004, 7082, 7989
Agreed. ;)


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [LEAK] Windows 8.1 (Blue) build 9471 x64 English        Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:08 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:13 am

Posts
2017

Location
Slovenia, Central Europe.

Favourite OS
Windows 98 SE 4.10.2222B
hounsell wrote:
They don't get an artefact and start knocking bits off because someone down the line because someone changed them slightly.

It's like an archaeologist finding an old jug and then knocking the handle off because someone later repaired it a few years down the line. Sure, it'd be nice to have an original, but we don't have that. Knocking the modified bits off doesn't help - a jug without a handle has less in common with the original than a jug with a repaired handle.

That's true.

Quote:
Your archaeologist analogy is a load of crap anyway. We're not archaeologists, we're beta collectors. This modification makes sod all difference, because there'll almost certainly be an original ISO with this ei.cfg anyway. Sure, this ISO is not *that* ISO. But it's a bit much to then make your first post in the topic bitching about how inobservant members are for not zealously satisfying your purity fetish. It's a leak, and all leaks are good.

If it makes no difference, then I can't why it's so important for you to keep the file in.

Quote:
And of course you'd rather everyone just fall in line. It's how you operated for years. Didn't accept any questioning of certain things you held to be true. Guess it's just as well some of us persisted in counteracting that misinformation. I don't recall receiving your thanks for my persistence in exposing the real truth.

For that matter, last year I think, I did come on AlphaChat and PM apologies for my past crap to you, Derf, soulman, etc.
Anyway, the FTP admin has decided he will remove ei.cfg, he has noted your opinions and decided to disagree with them.

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.

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




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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