BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 28d, 6h, 30m | CPU: 37% | MEM: 5500MB of 12227MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Chicago build before 58s        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 9:49 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon May 07, 2007 11:08 pm

Posts
399

Location
Copenhagen, Denmark

Favourite OS
Microsoft Windows 95 OSR 2.1 RTM
Are there any confirmed Chicago builds before build 58s?
I read something about that KenOath has a screenshot of build 40?

_________________
My gaming machine: AST Advantage 6066d. Cyrix 66MHz 486DX. 4MB RAM. 512KB Cirrus Logic onboard graphics. Creativa Vibra 16 ISA. 520MB HDD, 3.5" FDD, 40x CD-ROM. MS-DOS 6.22/Windows 3.1


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:21 pm 
Reply with quote
of course, 53 is a leaked build :D


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:30 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
3557
Namronia wrote:
of course, 53 is a leaked build :D

I've never seen it, is it mentioned anywhere?


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:31 pm 
Reply with quote
of course, but its not bootable, you have to install it from DOS

filesize:

30,5 MB (32.053.248 Bytes)


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:37 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Posts
3557
Please show me an actual proof that this build exists. According to the checklist, the versions that appeared or were up for discussion were proven fake. Also, no Chicago builds were "bootable" by default AFAIK, they all had to be installed cleanly from DOS or as an upgrade to Windows 3.x..


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:39 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon May 07, 2007 11:08 pm

Posts
399

Location
Copenhagen, Denmark

Favourite OS
Microsoft Windows 95 OSR 2.1 RTM
I know build 53. I found it at WinWorld

But it`s a fake build 58s :(

I think the fake build 58s is on the AbyssUnderground server too


Link to winworld removed by Fireware.

_________________
My gaming machine: AST Advantage 6066d. Cyrix 66MHz 486DX. 4MB RAM. 512KB Cirrus Logic onboard graphics. Creativa Vibra 16 ISA. 520MB HDD, 3.5" FDD, 40x CD-ROM. MS-DOS 6.22/Windows 3.1


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:41 pm 
Reply with quote
is it really a fake??? its a little bit bigger than the 58


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 10:50 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon May 07, 2007 11:08 pm

Posts
399

Location
Copenhagen, Denmark

Favourite OS
Microsoft Windows 95 OSR 2.1 RTM
The build number says 58s in system properties

_________________
My gaming machine: AST Advantage 6066d. Cyrix 66MHz 486DX. 4MB RAM. 512KB Cirrus Logic onboard graphics. Creativa Vibra 16 ISA. 520MB HDD, 3.5" FDD, 40x CD-ROM. MS-DOS 6.22/Windows 3.1


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 11:03 pm 
Reply with quote
oh... now i see it too, sry


Top
 PostPost subject: Re: Chicago build before 58s        Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 11:24 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:45 pm

Posts
1432

Location
UK

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
hjort wrote:
Are there any confirmed Chicago builds before build 58s?
I read something about that KenOath has a screenshot of build 40?
I know 34 got leaked but rar archive was too much corrupt.
About 70% damaged...


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 2:07 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 07, 2006 12:04 pm

Posts
2797

Favourite OS
Anything checked :P
A while back I was looking in my 58s install files and found a few scene bbs ads & an nfo with install instructions... so 58s probably came from the old school bbs scene

and I made a deduction that some very early builds of chicago used win3.1 setup [only in 58s for component modification]

_________________
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:        Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 2:57 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:51 am

Posts
150

Location
Bucharest, CA

Favourite OS
Windows Vista SP1
There was a build 38 that unblestone claimed it was discovered by what he called the "German Beta Group" and not leaked because of the arguments he had with KenOath. It is not sure if the build is real, but it could be. For more information, including a screenshot, see the "Chicago build 38" topic started by me in the Windows Discussion forum and the original topic of unblestone's claim which is linked-to in the topic referenced above.


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 11:38 am 
Reply with quote
Xammer wrote:
There was a build 38 that unblestone claimed it was
discovered by what he called the "German Beta Group" and not leaked
because of the arguments he had with KenOath. It is not sure if the build
is real, but it could be. For more information, including a screenshot, see
the "Chicago build 38" topic started by me in the Windows Discussion
forum and the original topic of unblestone's claim which is linked-to in the
topic referenced above.

If this leaked build 38 was real, why hasn't this GBG group added it to their
Windows 95 Pre-Release Checklist,
they've certainly had long enough to add it if it were real.


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 11:40 am 
Reply with quote
Aztech wrote:
Xammer wrote:
There was a build 38 that unblestone claimed it was
discovered by what he called the "German Beta Group" and not leaked
because of the arguments he had with KenOath. It is not sure if the build
is real, but it could be. For more information, including a screenshot, see
the "Chicago build 38" topic started by me in the Windows Discussion
forum and the original topic of unblestone's claim which is linked-to in the
topic referenced above.

If this leaked build 38 was real, why hasn't this GBG group added it to their
Windows 95 Pre-Release Checklist,
they've certainly had long enough to add it if it WERE real.


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 5:30 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:51 am

Posts
150

Location
Bucharest, CA

Favourite OS
Windows Vista SP1
I don't know, maybe they forgot about that page (it has been very long time without any updates).
But build 38 could be fake.


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 12:07 pm 
Reply with quote
How'd I end up with a double post above?
I edited my original & submitted it, came back
today and there's a double. :?

About any beta of any kind, until it lands on my hard drive i'm sceptical.


Top
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 10:21 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:06 pm

Posts
2393
It looks as though you pressed Quote instead of Edit.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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 © 2006-2018

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS