Windows 7 - Differences between the same Build?

Discuss Windows Vista, 7, 8.x, 10 and Windows Server 2008, 2008R2, 2012, 2016, 2019, Home Server, SBS 2008, SBS 2011.
Post Reply
Bavario

Windows 7 - Differences between the same Build?

Post by Bavario »

Hi,
Somewhere in the internet I found the Windows 7 Build 6519. Now i have a question about it. I have read about a partition that is created by the setup. Everywhere is written that its hidden and not accessable by the explorer. But in my Virtual PC I can access this partion. Also I have read about a timebomb, a BSOD every two hours. My sytem is running longer without any BSOD.
Is there a differenc between the same build?

hounsell

Re: Windows 7 - Differences between the same Build?

Post by hounsell »

Bavario wrote:Hi,
Somewhere in the internet I found the Windows 7 Build 6519. Now i have a question about it. I have read about a partition that is created by the setup. Everywhere is written that its hidden and not accessable by the explorer. But in my Virtual PC I can access this partion. Also I have read about a timebomb, a BSOD every two hours. My sytem is running longer without any BSOD.
Is there a differenc between the same build?
Firstly, have you set the date back? That will allow you to run the build longer than two hours. Also the time sync can cause it to last longer.

I think I could access the partition as well. Either way, it isn't a large issue.

Luthian
FTP Access
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:32 am

Post by Luthian »

When I installed it (as a dual boot with vista) it only ended up with one, Windows 7 partition.
I had 20 gb free (empty partition) on the disk, and Windows 7 Installed to that partition without any changes...

FarCry3r
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

Post by FarCry3r »

on Virtual PC 2007 SP1, I have single 10GB virtual hdd. after installing 7, it separate the partition into 2 partitions. the second partition is around 500mb. anyone have idea what is happening?

Chicago
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:47 am
Location: $HOME

Post by Chicago »

FarCry3r wrote:on Virtual PC 2007 SP1, I have single 10GB virtual hdd. after installing 7, it separate the partition into 2 partitions. the second partition is around 500mb. anyone have idea what is happening?
Just normal
It did the same for all.
We all have this little 500 meg partition.

FarCry3r
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

Post by FarCry3r »

Chicago wrote:
FarCry3r wrote:on Virtual PC 2007 SP1, I have single 10GB virtual hdd. after installing 7, it separate the partition into 2 partitions. the second partition is around 500mb. anyone have idea what is happening?
Just normal
It did the same for all.
We all have this little 500 meg partition.
so what is this actually? some sort of rescue partition? I'm curious because setup didn't ask for any partition making etc...

Chicago
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:47 am
Location: $HOME

Post by Chicago »

It writes some files for activation I think. I'm not really sure what is it for, but I'm sure it's not just for pleasure. hahaha

Bavario

Re: Windows 7 - Differences between the same Build?

Post by Bavario »

hounsell wrote:
Bavario wrote:Hi,
Somewhere in the internet I found the Windows 7 Build 6519. Now i have a question about it. I have read about a partition that is created by the setup. Everywhere is written that its hidden and not accessable by the explorer. But in my Virtual PC I can access this partion. Also I have read about a timebomb, a BSOD every two hours. My sytem is running longer without any BSOD.
Is there a differenc between the same build?
Firstly, have you set the date back? That will allow you to run the build longer than two hours. Also the time sync can cause it to last longer.

I think I could access the partition as well. Either way, it isn't a large issue.
Yes the date is set back to the end of 2007. Could it be because I dont have activated? Nevertheless I have a serialnumber insert by the setup !?

The partition i didnt touch anyway. It was shown at the first start...

FarCry3r
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:08 am
Location: Malaysia
Contact:

Re: Windows 7 - Differences between the same Build?

Post by FarCry3r »

Bavario wrote:
hounsell wrote:
Bavario wrote:Hi,
Somewhere in the internet I found the Windows 7 Build 6519. Now i have a question about it. I have read about a partition that is created by the setup. Everywhere is written that its hidden and not accessable by the explorer. But in my Virtual PC I can access this partion. Also I have read about a timebomb, a BSOD every two hours. My sytem is running longer without any BSOD.
Is there a differenc between the same build?
Firstly, have you set the date back? That will allow you to run the build longer than two hours. Also the time sync can cause it to last longer.

I think I could access the partition as well. Either way, it isn't a large issue.
Yes the date is set back to the end of 2007. Could it be because I dont have activated? Nevertheless I have a serialnumber insert by the setup !?

The partition i didnt touch anyway. It was shown at the first start...
since this is based on Vista, you probably won't need a cd-key like vista too. I also never experienced BSOD, not even single one. It runs on VPC for more than 6 hours. and I also didn't touch the partition, it just there and I just look at it...

Chicago
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:47 am
Location: $HOME

Re: Windows 7 - Differences between the same Build?

Post by Chicago »

FarCry3r wrote:
Bavario wrote:
hounsell wrote:
Bavario wrote:Hi,
Somewhere in the internet I found the Windows 7 Build 6519. Now i have a question about it. I have read about a partition that is created by the setup. Everywhere is written that its hidden and not accessable by the explorer. But in my Virtual PC I can access this partion. Also I have read about a timebomb, a BSOD every two hours. My sytem is running longer without any BSOD.
Is there a differenc between the same build?
Firstly, have you set the date back? That will allow you to run the build longer than two hours. Also the time sync can cause it to last longer.

I think I could access the partition as well. Either way, it isn't a large issue.
Yes the date is set back to the end of 2007. Could it be because I dont have activated? Nevertheless I have a serialnumber insert by the setup !?

The partition i didnt touch anyway. It was shown at the first start...
since this is based on Vista, you probably won't need a cd-key like vista too. I also never experienced BSOD, not even single one. It runs on VPC for more than 6 hours. and I also didn't touch the partition, it just there and I just look at it...
It depends on the your BIOS date.
Set it once to the current date, and you'll see.
I removed Vista and set up 7 as my main OS for a while.
So, I know all those issues.

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

Post by Rob Jansen »

It looks like that the extra partition is a partition made by the install for Vista's recovery image.

It just boots in to PE and then start repairing (like the OEM versions, if you buy a laptop or computer you get an recovery partition).

Its not large, i have an Windows Recovery Environment on CD about 300MB.

dean corso
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:00 pm

Post by dean corso »

is it maybe a swap partition?

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

Post by Rob Jansen »

Windows Swaps with pagefile.sys

hounsell

Post by hounsell »

Well, on mine there is simply nothing but boot files:

Image

Daniel1981
Donator
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:09 am

Post by Daniel1981 »

The second partition supposed to be hidden, but there is a bug in that...
Anyway, the other partition is not for recovery, but for some Windows files that cannot be seen on Windows...
Those are some Windows files, also, some part of the kernel is stoared there, in case windows cannot work anymore, to save some data.

lisiuwah
FTP Access
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:27 am

Post by lisiuwah »

Seems that everyone of you end up with a 500M partition with single boot~~ I tried Dual boot with Vista 64 bit and couldn't find any partition mentioned.. It couldn't be a recovery partition then~ Otherwise it's too unfair for dual boot users:)

Luthian
FTP Access
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:32 am

Post by Luthian »

lisiuwah wrote:Seems that everyone of you end up with a 500M partition with single boot~~ I tried Dual boot with Vista 64 bit and couldn't find any partition mentioned.. It couldn't be a recovery partition then~ Otherwise it's too unfair for dual boot users:)
Same deal for me, except I dual booted with Windows Vista 32 bit. (I installed to a blank, but already formated partition with no unallocated space on the disk, from inside Vista)

hounsell

Post by hounsell »

Well, I'd conclude that it is just for boot files at the moment. For those dual-booting, it will already have a compatible bootloader, so 7 won't overwrite it.

thenico
FTP Access
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:13 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Post by thenico »

hounsell wrote:Well, on mine there is simply nothing but boot files:

Image
grldr ?
Grub4Dos loader ?.
It was used in the oembios-crack.

Is this partition untouched ?

hounsell

Post by hounsell »

Ah. Good point.

At this point, I should mention I used the VistaLoader crack

Bavario

Post by Bavario »

my partion is different. I don´t have this grldr-file. if you have a look on the date it is made later.

hounsell

Post by hounsell »

Yeh, as mentioned before, the grldr is part of my activation crack (VistaLoader) I am running with 7

seanhobbs

Post by seanhobbs »

I installed M1 (32bit) on a separate drive with my original vista drive install still attached (64 bit), it seemed to automatically give me the option on boot to choose which OS to boot into. After setting the date to the current date, M1 died, but setting the bios clock back resolved the issue after a re-auth of the install. I used the came ultimate key on both installs.

bointhemix

Post by bointhemix »

there is 64bit?

tristan
Donator
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 11:40 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by tristan »

bointhemix wrote:there is 64bit?
Yes, but not publicly leaked
here is a screen:
Image

Post Reply