BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Screenshots Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 28d, 16h, 15m | CPU: 57% | MEM: 5731MB of 10954MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Longhorn 5112        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:18 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
hy :)
i live windows longhorn and i have a few versions of it..
but i want to know if is there a version of longhorn that i can use as a main os ?
and how stable is "Longhorn 5112" ? ?


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:33 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Thu Aug 14, 2008 3:15 am

Posts
121

Favourite OS
Mac OS X 10.7&Ubuntu 11.04
There is one version of Longhorn that is stable; 6000 no but seriously don't use LH as a main OS. 5112 is stable enough but just don't do it.

_________________
TheTutorial


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:41 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
Chris1244 wrote:
There is one version of Longhorn that is stable; 6000 no but seriously don't use LH as a main OS. 5112 is stable enough but just don't do it.

ok thanks for the info :)


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:24 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
alinux09 wrote:
Chris1244 wrote:
There is one version of Longhorn that is stable; 6000 no but seriously don't use LH as a main OS. 5112 is stable enough but just don't do it.

ok thanks for the info :)


isnt build 6000 vista ?


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:44 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:52 am

Posts
890

Location
United States

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2008 Standard
Yes it is. Anyway, 5112 IS stable enough to use as a main OS, and 5112 is Vista not Longhorn. The stable Longhorn builds are 3683, 3706, and 3718. All others are unstable, espeically 5048.

EDIT: Actually, it's stable enough, but because the 4xxx builds are really really unstable, the bar has been set very low, so in today standards 5112 isn't stable to use as a main OS.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Thlump on Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:47 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
Thlump wrote:
Yes it is. Anyway, 5112 IS stable enough to use as a main OS, and 5112 is Vista not Longhorn. The stable Longhorn builds are 3683, 3706, and 3718. All others are unstable, espeically 5048.


were can i get 5112 ? and 3683 ?


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 5:52 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat May 24, 2008 10:05 am

Posts
2045
I installed 5112 a few weeks ago because I remembered it being one of my favorite builds...
You have to bear in mind, the older it gets, the less stable it becomes, and by today standards, Longhorn Betas, even 5112, are not stable.
I'd encourage you to try it out, its a great build, close to what Vista should have been, but its hasn't been updated since 2005.
If you like the look and feel, there have been plenty of attempts to port the UI to Vista...

(Notes I couldn't fit into my little tale: This build is rather laggy, and has a lot of problems rendering Icons)


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 9:06 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Nov 01, 2008 4:06 pm

Posts
171

Location
Computerland

Favourite OS
Always newest but not this time
but you can try this with dual boot if you like & atleast they are stable to work somethink unlike build 4093


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:29 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
jaidev66 wrote:
but you can try this with dual boot if you like & atleast they are stable to work somethink unlike build 4093


yeah but were can i get 5112 or 4093 or a longhorn that is more stable like 36xx


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 4:28 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
alinux09 wrote:
jaidev66 wrote:
but you can try this with dual boot if you like & atleast they are stable to work somethink unlike build 4093


yeah but were can i get 5112 or 4093 or a longhorn that is more stable like 36xx


Get enough good post and request advanded members access.

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 4:31 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
DjRob wrote:
alinux09 wrote:
jaidev66 wrote:
but you can try this with dual boot if you like & atleast they are stable to work somethink unlike build 4093


yeah but were can i get 5112 or 4093 or a longhorn that is more stable like 36xx


Get enough good post and request advanded members access.


i requested yesterday...
and im still waiting :(


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 4:42 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
alinux09 wrote:
DjRob wrote:
alinux09 wrote:

yeah but were can i get 5112 or 4093 or a longhorn that is more stable like 36xx


Get enough good post and request advanded members access.


i requested yesterday...
and im still waiting :(


Andy, the Administrator of this forum wrote:
Even though this topic was locked, I'm going to add my 2p anyway.

Yes, I do have a life and I do have other things to do in it other than come on the forum and verify members whenever they sign up to the Advanced Members group. Yes it was probably 2am here when you posted. I was still up but only because I was watching a movie. I wasn't on the internet and I wasn't checking my e-mails. Generally I only do the Advanced Members subscriptions twice a week, when I find time to do so, not every time someone asks for access. Some people just need to be patient and read the guidelines for the contributions. As pointed out it does say "up to and over 24 hours". This means it could be 1 hour, a day or 7 days, or even a month. The key is patience, something a lot of new members here seem to lack. And now, just to be petty, I'm not going to verify any members at all today. You can wait until I have real spare time and not time I've tried to find just to do it.


http://www.betaarchive.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6429

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 4:59 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
i see :)
thanks..
time flyes :P


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:40 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
I'd further suggest making sure all your posts are contributing and conform to the rules. Having posts like some of yours that contain images not uploaded to the BA image uploader will not help your chances.

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:29 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:20 pm

Posts
214

Location
Kent, UK

Favourite OS
Windows 7
Seriously, don't do it. All of the older 4xxx and 3xxx builds where made before they switched from the XP to Server 2003 codebase, and as such they will be absolutely riddled with the multitude of security problems that XP was subject to after Service Pack 1. If you keep the machine away from the internet you may survive but if you have one and want it on the internet, seriously, don't do it. 3683 had massive problems with memory leaks in explorer.exe anyway.

As for the Vista betas, you also need to take the same point into consideration. Firstly, they will expire and removing the timebomb is not easy, secondly, again you cannot update them so they will be insecure, also some drivers may refuse to install on older builds

In simple terms... if you use an old Beta as your main OS, keep the machine off of the internet and so some research about hardware support before you dive in.

_________________
i7-2700K @ 4.8 GHZ, Kandalf LCS, ATI 6950, 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP, Asus ROG Maximus IV Extreme-Z, 60GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:54 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
Shane wrote:
All of the older 4xxx and 3xxx builds where made before they switched from the XP to Server 2003 codebase,


Wrong.

- All builds before switch are SERVER 2003 RELEASE CANDIDATE code
- All builds after the switch are SERVER 2003 / SERVER 2003 SERVICE PACK 1 code

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:27 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:20 pm

Posts
214

Location
Kent, UK

Favourite OS
Windows 7
No, I can assure you that I am not wrong. I have a contact who actually got me into the Vista beta, and he has close contacts within Microsoft. He told me about the codebase change before it actually occured, and he has never been wrong about anything like that.

_________________
i7-2700K @ 4.8 GHZ, Kandalf LCS, ATI 6950, 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP, Asus ROG Maximus IV Extreme-Z, 60GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 2:24 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Dec 14, 2008 11:46 pm

Posts
1173

Location
/home/aLinux

Favourite OS
Longhorn 4074
tomorow i will install 5112 on my laptop cause i want to see how it looks and works..
but on my pc i will never install longhorn or vista's of course betas
last time i did it i got "bad" on my "C:" drive so i had to format all my hdd partitions
and i losed about 300GB so this time i learned my lesson :D


Top  Profile  YIM
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:39 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:09 am

Posts
411

Favourite OS
Windows 7
Shane wrote:
No, I can assure you that I am not wrong. I have a contact who actually got me into the Vista beta, and he has close contacts within Microsoft. He told me about the codebase change before it actually occured, and he has never been wrong about anything like that.


Look buddy, I am sure that DjRob understands a lot on betas... so dont be so sure about what you said on LH before & after switch...


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:05 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am

Posts
368

Location
Sweden
Daniel1981 wrote:
Look buddy, I am sure that DjRob understands a lot on betas... so dont be so sure about what you said on LH before & after switch...


I too have to agree with Rob on this one. 2k3 forked from XP and was in development at the same time as Longhorn. When the reset happened they synced the codebase so that the "new" start on Vista was with the most current 2k3 code they had at the time. Although I seem to recall that LH wasn't officially based on 2k3 until M5 or something like that there's little doubt in my mind that the base of it had more in common with .NET server than XP prior to that.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:13 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:20 pm

Posts
214

Location
Kent, UK

Favourite OS
Windows 7
My friend has contacts within the Windows development team, thats how he got me into the Vista beta, I think you will find that he is a pretty good source of information ;)

_________________
i7-2700K @ 4.8 GHZ, Kandalf LCS, ATI 6950, 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP, Asus ROG Maximus IV Extreme-Z, 60GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:17 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am

Posts
368

Location
Sweden
Shane wrote:
My friend has contacts within the Windows development team, thats how he got me into the Vista beta, I think you will find that he is a pretty good source of information ;)


So? I have a friend working on the live development team, that doesn't mean that he knows everything about the development about the various live services. Not to mention that the "Windows Development Team" isn't one team, it's a bunch of teams. The people on the UX team might not know everything the kernel team does etc.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:19 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:20 pm

Posts
214

Location
Kent, UK

Favourite OS
Windows 7
I don't know what teams he knows and who they are, but they have never been wrong about any of the other information that has been given to me, so I am more inclined to trust them over a person on a forum who proclaims themselves as a tech guru (no offence intended)

_________________
i7-2700K @ 4.8 GHZ, Kandalf LCS, ATI 6950, 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP, Asus ROG Maximus IV Extreme-Z, 60GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:24 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am

Posts
368

Location
Sweden
Shane wrote:
I don't know what teams he knows and who they are, but they have never been wrong about any of the other information that has been given to me, so I am more inclined to trust them over a person on a forum who proclaims themselves as a tech guru (no offence intended)


Sorry but common knowledge and official information from a company trumps a guy on a forum who "knows a guy who knows a guy". No offense intended. :)


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject:        Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:31 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:14 pm

Posts
6612

Location
United Kingdom

Favourite OS
Server 2012 R2
DjRob wrote:
- All builds before switch are SERVER 2003 RELEASE CANDIDATE code
- All builds after the switch are SERVER 2003 / SERVER 2003 SERVICE PACK 1 code


This is largely right, it's just after the reset it's actually based on Server 2003 SP1 RC Code.

You just have to look at the Server 2003 lines and the 3xxx Longhorn lines side by side to realise that they are built off the same code.

And ddew is right in what he says, in that a developer will not know everything about the development of the product they are developing, that sort of job is for the managers anyway (well, ideally). This information doesn't just come from careful observation, but from contacts even better placed than developers (Usually those within the build labs, they often get the complete picture that developers don't always see).

Of course, some code in the Longhorn will have come from XP (in the sense that the code is barely changed from XP), such as the client features that aren't present in Server 2003 (though these were still 'updated' in the Server 2003 fork, as it was needed for the XP x64 and XP ia64 (Version 2003) builds, which were based on Server 2003 code anyway.

_________________
BuildFeed - the ultimate collaborative NT build list - Windows Longhorn - a look at a defining Microsoft project


Top  Profile  WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  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 © 2006-2018

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS