Hi guys, I found two pictures of this build... (please don't question me if it is fake and I did not fake it).





What could be real
The first 2 start menu buttons, same as 34. The icons on desktop also looks similar to build 34, same number of desktop icons.

Things that doesn't make sense
Judging by the build number, it should be compiled some time before 34 so maybe in mid February but it look like those usability testing builds. 1 start menu button is different and there is no clock in the taskbar which make it looks awkward. Its a bit different from 34 where it should be very similar and the copyright says 1985-1993 but it really should be 1994 after seeing all builds from 1993 says 1994.

The user information makes it look fake because nobody will install a build using the name Chicago Usability Testers and organisation Microsoft Corp. it look unprofessional. Also there is no way to set registered user information before 73f.

Can it be that this is build 34, but edited screenshots? Because do remember to George Wolfwitz his 34, it’s really near to the that one.

My screenshots are 31 but the real 34 looks different.

We don't know how fast development went back then. What you're seeing could be perfectly normal.


Maybe pre-34 builds said 1993? Who knows.


[quote]The user information makes it look fake because nobody will install a build using the name Chicago Usability Testers and organisation Microsoft Corp. it look unprofessional. Also there is no way to set registered user information before 73f.[/quitep]
Initially, Chicago used the Janus/Jastro-based Setup which combined the old MS-DOS Setup and Windows 3.x Setup. You certainly could set such information there. Then at some point before 58s, they replaced Setup with the new one, rewritten from scratch, which had no user name/company input for a while (the dialog was there but there was no related code). That was then fixed by 73f.

Now, there's still no evidence this is real, but we still need to get things right.

These two screenshots definitely look real to me. These two screenshots have some good resemblances to a video that surfaced in 2012:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbVRWziUHdY
The icons are the same as in build 34 but not the same as in the Usability Testing build. The start buttons are the same as in the Usability Testing build, different from build 34 (the 2nd icon is smaller and the 3rd icon is just a question mark). This clearly puts this build somewhere between the Usability Testing build and build 34.

Of course there's no way of knowing if the build 31 screenshots and build 34 video are real, but it is interesting nonetheless.
As for the lack of a clock, the Usability Testing builds also did not have any clock. It's hard to see behind the webcam, but no clock is visible, just a white bar, as seen in the Chicago 31 screenshot.

Adding to Battler's explanations for the 1993 copyright and user info, edited user information is also present in the build 34 video: "George" from "CRYSTAL DATA". Just like in the build 31 screenshots.
I really want to know where these screenshots were found...

Do you know where you found these and where they originally came from?

If I remember right, they came from an "unleaked beta screenshot" collection. In that collection there are a few earlier Chicago screenshots but I've deleted them already as they are obviously fake. Now all those images were scattered around the place and there might even be more. The origin of that collection (I think) was from a collector that was supposedly a private beta tester.

I know betaguy224, who faked various 2x and 3x build screenshots in the mid-late 2000's. But if there were fake screenshots in the collection then it may question the authority of these screenshots(?)
I've also seen a supposed screenshot collection from build ~35, in around 2013-2014, that was quite similar to build 34 and this build 31. But I believe it could be fake as well.

I found 2 pictures of Chicago without the clock... But clearly those two were compiled after 73g because it has a close button for all windows. So I guess it proves the two screenshots I found fake because clock was removed some point after 73g and re-added before 81, so a build without clock can only be in that range of builds. Clearly 31 is not even close to those builds. The Usability Testing builds might be fake as well because there is no clock and the video it too blurry which is a bit suspicious.

I think this is the second build of Usability Testing build because the Windows Chicago build 31 looks the same with the second build of the Usability Testing build. Also, Tracker is not here in the Usability Testing build and the Windows Chicago build 31, but Tracker is here in the Windows Chicago build 34.

Wait for a second... No recycle bin is here. Also, File Cabinet and Programs icons are not the same with Usability Testing Builds. But start buttons are the same as the Windows Chicago build 58s.

The reason why the UTB video is blurry is because it was recorded in 1993

So now every build is fake. Heck, 58s is fake. Windows 3.11 is fake. I am fake.

Just because some pieces don't fit doesn't necessarily mean that every build with or without this bits and pieces is fake. We need more research between all these builds near pre-100.

These are known mockups/concepts, which ReflectiaX talked about in this topic a while ago.

The hilarious part is that I'm 90% sure the font used for all the interface elements like "Discs" and "Desktop" is the same font used in Fallout (1997) for the interface.

Sorry to post off-topic stuff here but this (I think) is another questionable screenshot in the collection.


It is build 57, nothing more than 58s with taskbar at the top.

Again, don't kill me. I also have screenshots of known fakes and fakes evolved around them and I will not upload them for my personal safety .

This 57 screenshot does not look very legitimate to me, but there's nothing proving it could be fishy, so who knows right?

You've got to know what nonsense false hope has caused for us before. Actually I was under the impression that discussing Chicago was banned because of a dead horse policy, following all the warring a few years ago.

People are hopeful and fake screenshots are easy to make - hell, fake builds are easy to make with a copy of Resource Workshop or eXeScope, I've done it myself for the chucks - and nothing can be above suspicion. This is about verifying info and builds, and not accepting them until all doubt has been removed.