Windows 3.1 builds

[DeFacto]

In this magazine article from a serbian computer magazine called "Računari" (=Computers) from December '91 I found a reference to Windows 3.1 build 34f. We have build 34e, but the two are probably very simmilar.... Still, it's an interesting find.

The article also says it comes on 5 3.5" 1.44MB floppy disks and is labeled as "Beta Release 1".

[TheCollector1988]

so, if 34f is indeed "beta release 1", then build 34e would be the same.

[DeFacto]

Wasn't build 34 always considered a Beta 1?

But anyway, it's kinda logical that since there are 34e and 34f, that there were also from a-d and possibly from f onwards...

[MbccompanyX]

We need to find the floppy, it can be a good piece for beta collectors

[DeFacto]

We need to find the floppy, it can be a good piece for beta collectors

Almost a mission impossible. AFAIK this is the first confirmation of the build at all, so I don't think anyone still has it...

[TheCollector1988]

We need to find the floppy, it can be a good piece for beta collectors

Almost a mission impossible. AFAIK this is the first confirmation of the build at all, so I don't think anyone still has it...

yeah, it's like getting NT 3.2 build 1.175.1 outside Microsoft.

[MbccompanyX]

We need to find the floppy, it can be a good piece for beta collectors

Almost a mission impossible. AFAIK this is the first confirmation of the build at all, so I don't think anyone still has it...

mission impossible for olthers, we need only find that floppy on ebay or olther site that sell things

[DeFacto]

The only people who had it were the journalist at the said magazine. Unfortunately, this magazine is long dead, so finding the authors would be just as hard as finding the build itself.

EDIT: @MbccompanyX Good luck with that. Also, here's another page talking about a beta build of Windows 3.1 (no exact build number stated but probably 34f) with some screenshots.

[MbccompanyX]

The only people who had it were the journalist at the said magazine. Unfortunately, this magazine is long dead, so finding the authors would be just as hard as finding the build itself.

EDIT: @MbccompanyX Good luck with that. Also, here's another page talking about a beta build of Windows 3.1 (no exact build number stated but probably 34f) with some screenshots.

only one copy of the floppy? i think that exist more of 20 copies of that floppy

[DeFacto]

I was talking about people outside MS that we know of for sure... Obviously there were other testers, but can't really find them if you don't know who they were, don't you think?

[MbccompanyX]

I was talking about people outside MS that we know of for sure... Obviously there were other testers, but can't really find them if you don't know who they were, don't you think?

we had only a pierce of paper, that isn't from america. Maybe the 34f was a world-wide beta not only a simple beta

[CaptainPeanut]

I was talking about people outside MS that we know of for sure... Obviously there were other testers, but can't really find them if you don't know who they were, don't you think?

we had only a pierce of paper, that isn't from america. Maybe the 34f was a world-wide beta not only a simple beta

You certainly don't know the difficulty of getting an unleaked build.

[Sgt. Goodal]

ah windows 3.1 back when windows was a decent os

i hope this build leaks soon

[DeFacto]

As said, that will hardly ever happend due to obvious reasons.

[Creative3DMM]

Just wondering for curiosity...are there any Rare or LOST versions of Windows 3.1?

What i mean with LOST: Is Windows 3.1 versions that are gone forever and that will never be seen again in this existence.

[DeFacto]

Uhm... no, there's plenty of copies both online and in RL, for both RTM and beta builds. So it's definetly not lost, but there are several rare editions (mostly OEM) and builds (such as this one).

[TheCollector1988]

Uhm... no, there's plenty of copies both online and in RL, for both RTM and beta builds. So it's definetly not lost, but there are several rare editions (mostly OEM) and builds (such as this one).

including some mentioned ones, like 43e, 70 etc. (I believe 70 was mentioned somewhere but I don't remember where)

[DeFacto]

68 (which is leaked), 70 and 71 are mentioned in a French MS KB article regarding some MS Office programs and OLE... These definetly exist because the article clearly states that they recieved error reports about the before mentioned problem from testers using beta version 3.1.068, 3.1.070 and 3.1.071.

BTW, that same magazine (and some others) stated several times that there were over 7000 beta builds of MS-DOS 5.0...

[marxo]

The magazine isn't dead, it's part of "Svet kompjutera" (World of Computers) www.sk.rs. Maybe you could contact someone there and ask. I've also seen a professor showing NT4 SP7 in a book published by PMF (University of Mathematics and Natural science) , I think it was Build 1384 or Build 1389. The book wasn't mine so I couldn't scan it, but if anyone had it, the guys from Svet Kompjutera would.

[DeFacto]

Thanks for the info... Maybe I'll contact them, but I highly doubt they still have something from 20+ years ago. :/

[Creative3DMM]

Uhm... no, there's plenty of copies both online and in RL, for both RTM and beta builds. So it's definetly not lost, but there are several rare editions (mostly OEM) and builds (such as this one).

Alright, well that's all i needed!

[DeFacto]

I may aswell expand this topic onto other windows builds described in said magazines... There's a 5 page article about Chicago build 58s from January 1994 with wonderfull screenshots. The build is definetly 58s because a screenshot from page 2 says so.

Most of you probably don't understand serbian, so the text is of little help to you (and it would take some time to translate it), but the screenshots are indeed very nice and good quality.

[WinPC]

It would have already been outdated, though, by the time that that article was written. Either that, or it somehow got published late, because by that point, Microsoft had already compiled and released Build 73g, not to mention that it was the December 1993 PDC (Professional Developers Conference) release, as far as I know.

[DeFacto]

Presumably, they didn't get instant access to every build rightaway... In some other magazine, they reivewed build 189 (itself from September 1994) as late as in February 1995, so I suppose you get the point. And here's the scan of that article:

[The Distractor]

It would have already been outdated, though, by the time that that article was written. Either that, or it somehow got published late, because by that point, Microsoft had already compiled and released Build 73g, not to mention that it was the December 1993 PDC (Professional Developers Conference) release, as far as I know.

58s was the Pre-Release (or Preliminary, not sure which) Developer's Kit (the PDK).
73g was PDK2.