Windows Whistler Beta 2 64 bit edition

Discuss Windows 2000, NT, XP and Windows Server 2000, 2003, SBS 2003.
Post Reply
Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Windows Whistler Beta 2 64 bit edition

Post by Daniel »

I found this in the READ1ST.TXT of the Whistler Beta 2 disc:

Code: Select all

======================================================================
5.0 Preinstallation Notes for 64-Bit Editions of Whistler Only 
======================================================================

Before you install 64-bit editions of Whistler Beta 2 on your
computer, be sure to read this section. This section contains
information about issues that affect the installation process. By
using this information to perform the installation, you can ensure
that the installation process proceeds smoothly and that Whistler
functions correctly.
Somewhere I have seen a screenshot of a 64bit Whistler.
Unfortunately I can't remeber where I found this screenshot or which build it was.
Has anybody else seen a screenshot of a 64bit Whistler?

I'll try to find the screenshot...

XDude
Donator
Posts: 1518
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Post by XDude »

AFAIK, 64bit Whistler referrers to the Itanium (IA-64), not x64.

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

XDude wrote:AFAIK, 64bit Whistler referrers to the Itanium (IA-64), not x64.
Yep, that's right:
"Whistler," the code name for the next version of the Microsoft Windows server operating system, represents the customer-driven evolution of Windows 2000. With Whistler, Microsoft is building on the reliability, manageability and scalability that customers value in Windows 2000, while offering support for new, high-performance 64-bit hardware architectures based on Intel Itanium processors.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/feat ... rbeta.mspx

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

I have found a screenshot

Image

Namronia

Post by Namronia »

Its not really a "Whistler", its much more a 2003 Server Beta so there are early x64 builds, but afaik there were absolutly no "Home x64" or "Pro x64" builds...

Edit, but it would be really intresting to have it anyways

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Namronia wrote:Its not really a "Whistler", its much more a 2003 Server Beta
Nope. Back in that time, "Whistler" referred to both the server and workstation editions of the then-new OS. They also had the same code base. Server 2003 wasn't even around back then, so it is a Whistler. The x86 Server & Advanced Server beta 2 I have here is also called Whistler and it doesn't matter if it's a workstation build or not. Additionally, there are IA64 builds of Whistler Professional & XP Professional.

Anyway, the IA64 builds of XP Pro (both version 2002 & 2003) are missing quite a bit of stuff compared to regular workstation versions, so I get the impression these are more or less rebranded and tweaked server editions, rather than a completely "new" build.
Namronia wrote:there are early x64 builds, but afaik there were absolutly no "Home x64" or "Pro x64" builds...
There are early x64 builds of .NET Server, 3620 being the earliest one I've read of. There was never a 64-bit Home Edition, no matter if for IA64 or AMD64 (x64 wasn't existing back then either). The earliest Pro AMD64 build I know of is 3790, without any service packs.

edit: Please don't mix up IA64 and AMD64/EM64T/x64. These two are completely different and as incompatible as they can be.
Last edited by empireum on Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

Somewhere I have seen a 222x 64-bit build. I'll find the screen...

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

2285:
Image

2462:
Image
Image

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

empireum wrote:2285:
Image

2462:
Image
Image
Wow. Do you own this build or only the screens?

Namronia

Post by Namronia »

D.Konieczny wrote:
empireum wrote:2285:
Image

2462:
Image
Image
Wow. Do you own this build or only the screens?
I think not even he has these builds

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Only the shots. My Whistler beta 2 kit contains 2462 Professional in English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Arabic, and Hebrew; 2462 Server in English and German; 2462 Advanced Server in English and German. The only 64-bit Whistler build I have is 2600 (v2002 RTM). v2003 RTM is already based off of Server 2003.

An interesting thing is that XP64's hardware requirements are much higher than x86's:
Image

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

empireum wrote:Only the shots. My Whistler beta 2 kit contains 2462 Professional in English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Arabic, and Hebrew; 2462 Server in English and German; 2462 Advanced Server in English and German. The only 64-bit Whistler build I have is 2600 (v2002 RTM). v2003 RTM is already based off of Server 2003.

An interesting thing is that XP64's hardware requirements are much higher than x86's:
Image
Could you post some screens of the Whistler 2600 x64 build???? Or maybe a iso

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

D.Konieczny wrote: Could you post some screens of the Whistler 2600 x64 build???? Or maybe a iso
It's IA64, not x64 (which now includes AMD64 and EM64T). These two are completely different and not compatible. I don't have any Itanium system, so I can't test the build. (I might dig into emulation though.) I can't upload the ISO either as it is warez (as is any RTM XP build).

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

empireum wrote:
D.Konieczny wrote: Could you post some screens of the Whistler 2600 x64 build???? Or maybe a iso
It's IA64, not x64 (which now includes AMD64 and EM64T). These two are completely different and not compatible. I don't have any Itanium system, so I can't test the build. (I might dig into emulation though.) I can't upload the ISO either as it is warez (as is any RTM XP build).
Damn!

But one question: Does this build have the same buildtag as the XP Final, 2600.xpclient.010817-1148 ???

Vista Ultimate R2
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:06 pm

Post by Vista Ultimate R2 »

When you say Whistler 2600 IA64, do you mean XP or Whistler Server (beta)? Is it possible to emulate the Itanium then?
Image

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

D.Konieczny wrote:But one question: Does this build have the same buildtag as the XP Final, 2600.xpclient.010817-1148
Version number is 5.1.2600 as is XP. Is there a way to find out the build tag without installing it and without using Reshacker?
Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:When you say Whistler 2600 IA64, do you mean XP or Whistler Server (beta)?
XP, full name is "Windows XP (Professional) 64-Bit Edition".
Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:Is it possible to emulate the Itanium then?
The Monster should be able to do this and I'm going to try this soon, but the last time I dared messing with it, I failed.
Last edited by empireum on Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

empireum wrote:
D.Konieczny wrote:But one question: Does this build have the same buildtag as the XP Final, 2600.xpclient.010817-1148
Version number is 5.1.2600 as is XP. Is there a way to find out the build tag without installing it and without using Reshacker?
The properties of the setup.exe on the root directory

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

D.Konieczny wrote:
empireum wrote:
D.Konieczny wrote:But one question: Does this build have the same buildtag as the XP Final, 2600.xpclient.010817-1148
Version number is 5.1.2600 as is XP. Is there a way to find out the build tag without installing it and without using Reshacker?
The properties of the setup.exe on the root directory
Only says 5.1.2600, as does ntoskrnl.exe.

Daniel
User avatar
Posts: 2607
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Germany, Earth
Contact:

Post by Daniel »

empireum wrote:
D.Konieczny wrote:
empireum wrote:
D.Konieczny wrote:But one question: Does this build have the same buildtag as the XP Final, 2600.xpclient.010817-1148
Version number is 5.1.2600 as is XP. Is there a way to find out the build tag without installing it and without using Reshacker?
The properties of the setup.exe on the root directory
Only says 5.1.2600, as does ntoskrnl.exe.

That's strange, because every single Windows build since Whistler 2223 has a build tag like (xxxxxx.YYMMDD-HHMM)...

Image

Vista Ultimate R2
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:06 pm

Post by Vista Ultimate R2 »

empireum wrote:
Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:Is it possible to emulate the Itanium then?
The Monster should be able to do this and I'm going to try this soon, but the last time I dared messing with it, I failed.
Wow, that looks very interesting, although I must say I can't figure out how you would go about getting it or getting it to work at all! If you had that you could try out all the old NT versions for other architectures and everything

D.Konieczny wrote: That's strange, because every single Windows build since Whistler 2223 has a build tag like (xxxxxx.YYMMDD-HHMM)...
Perhaps that is only true of the betas and not the RTMs like this IA64, I only get this with XP x86 2600 (though it could be because of Vista, as there is no Version tab at all):

Image
Image

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:Perhaps that is only true of the betas and not the RTMs like this IA64, I only get this with XP x86 2600 (though it could be because of Vista, as there is no Version tab at all):
Vista (the OS, not you ) is the culprit. Checked on XP and found out the build tag is the same as in XP x86: 5.1.2600.xpclient.010817-1148. Daniel, sorry it took me that long to find out.
Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:Wow, that looks very interesting, although I must say I can't figure out how you would go about getting it or getting it to work at all! If you had that you could try out all the old NT versions for other architectures and everything
I have it While it can emulate a single- or multi-processor IA64 system, it doesn't support Windows as a guest on there, "only" Linux. It can run Windows on simulated UP & SMP x86 & x64 systems, however. Here is a list of the systems/CPUs and OSes Simics can emulate & run. As for interfering with it, it doesn't have a GUI, it has its own CLI interface and is controlled by Python-like commands.

[off-topic]edit 1: Update: Got it to work. Also managed to boot Solaris10 into the install on an emulated UltraSPARC-II.
Image
[/off-topic]

edit 2: Some more Whistler64 shots:
Image
Image
Image

edit 3: Replaced Simics screenshot w/a finished one.
Last edited by empireum on Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Rob Jansen
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 5271
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm
Location: The Collection Book
Contact:

Post by Rob Jansen »

You can find the entire build tag in the windows registery.

At:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion
and then the Build Lab REG_SZ
Example:
2600.xpsp_sp2.gdr.070227-2254

Works in every windows NT from 3.1.

Lol 0 MHz.
Very fast!

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

@DjRob
That works, but what if you can't install the build? Your method would imply digging through the inf files creating the system hives. Checking setup.exe seems faster and easier though.

Rob Jansen
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 5271
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm
Location: The Collection Book
Contact:

Post by Rob Jansen »

empireum wrote:@DjRob
That works, but what if you can't install the build? Your method would imply digging through the inf files creating the system hives. Checking setup.exe seems faster and easier though.
Then it would be faster.
But i only meant this method when installed.

Post Reply