Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
I've found that image was EDITED!
Probably resources in msgina.dll or other branding files ware replaced, to get the effect, but this is so unprofessional, does someone have used paint for doing this?!
Original link
I've change color levels in Photoshop and I've found very strange artifact for "genuine" screenshot.
What I want to said is that Microsoft own all blank resources for branding any Windows version, alpha, beta or whatever... and I don't know who created this, but Microsoft it self is not.
but on this picture:
we can see that someone painted the picture with adding "lh" and replace over "xp".
for comparison I've put same settings for picture taken from Rob Jansen's installation of XP SP3.
You can see it here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And all my tests you can see here:
RGB values from letter "l" from lh and letter "p" from xp are different also (right pictures.)
Probably resources in msgina.dll or other branding files ware replaced, to get the effect, but this is so unprofessional, does someone have used paint for doing this?!
Original link
I've change color levels in Photoshop and I've found very strange artifact for "genuine" screenshot.
What I want to said is that Microsoft own all blank resources for branding any Windows version, alpha, beta or whatever... and I don't know who created this, but Microsoft it self is not.
but on this picture:
we can see that someone painted the picture with adding "lh" and replace over "xp".
for comparison I've put same settings for picture taken from Rob Jansen's installation of XP SP3.
You can see it here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And all my tests you can see here:
RGB values from letter "l" from lh and letter "p" from xp are different also (right pictures.)
Every box with any belongings in it is just Isus's theft from ŽL.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Grabberslasher was easily one of the most well respected, genuinely knowledgable, dedicated members of the beta community who leaked several of the builds in his private collection. I sincerely doubt that he would have faked a build just for a little bit of attention - especially considering he got plenty without needing to fake. Also having known him for years on and off and having numerous discussions with him / talking to some of his friends over the years, I can say for certain that this would be against his character.
tl;dr - not only did your images not prove anything, your claim is outlandish on principle.
tl;dr - not only did your images not prove anything, your claim is outlandish on principle.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Maybe the longhorn team lazy to recreate branding at the time and just painted and replace with lh text and start backporting some longhorn from pre reset projects into new base
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
It's indeed very strange. First time I saw those screenshot I already noticed the Lh was a bit weird, but I never bothered to really look into it. Why would microsoft just paint the Lh in if they have the blanc backgrounds? Only proof would be a leak of 5001 now!
-
WinPC
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
While I can certainly understand your doubts about those screenshots, you must also remember that this was supposed to have been an extremely early post-reset build, where they were basically starting out with a clean codebase. That is also why it is nearly the same as Windows XP itself in terms of actual functionality.maxtorix wrote:I've found that image was EDITED!
Probably resources in msgina.dll or other branding files were replaced, to get the effect, but this is so unprofessional, does someone have used paint for doing this?!
Also, remember the early x86-64 builds of Windows Server 2003? In the About Windows dialog box, they had "x64" written over them, obviously in Paint, yet as far as I can remember, they were completely real.
What we're talking about is something that was obviously highly experimental, and really, a lot of these pre-release builds have a lot of weird characteristics, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're fake. As far as I know, the person who posted these screenshots also has contacts who were Microsoft beta testers, and even if it was fake, I still highly doubt that he would have done it himself (rather, if it was fake, it would have more likely been a modification of some of the .DLL files as you said).
But I don't personally think that this is fake. Rather, I think that this is an extremely experimental build, and that they were just doing their best even to restore the project to working order. Probably, it was rushed, which would explain why they used the so-called "Windows LH" logo in the About Windows dialog box.
I don't think that he ever said that grabberslasher himself was the one responsible for it, but rather that the copy that was sent to him was a modification of Windows XP. In other words, what he is saying is that most likely, someone else sent him a build that was fake. And I replied to him, stating that this particular build is most likely real.Derf wrote:Grabberslasher was easily one of the most well respected, genuinely knowledgable, dedicated members of the beta community who leaked several of the builds in his private collection. I sincerely doubt that he would have faked a build just for a little bit of attention - especially considering he got plenty without needing to fake. Also having known him for years on and off and having numerous discussions with him / talking to some of his friends over the years, I can say for certain that this would be against his character.
tl;dr - not only did your images not prove anything, your claim is outlandish on principle.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Another good example of a non fake paint job are the Windows 2000 64 bit boot screens.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
I still think its real.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
The screen may be fake, but the build number is legit.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Agreed, 5001 must exist, aswell as 5000, 5002 and so on.AlphaBeta wrote:The screen may be fake, but the build number is legit.
- CaptainPeanut
- Donator
- Posts: 1381
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:25 pm
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
I still believe this build exists.
-
DeFacto
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
As others said, even if the screenshots are faked, the build itself can still exist... So your claims are premature.
-
hounsell
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
This may be a great discovery, but, i'm really interesting on leak of Longhorn Post-reset builds. Are stable and possible to use em day after day
EDIT: I know what must peoples in this forum have this build and others, but, i don't know why, not leak these. These peoples need think in our community, and, what the interesting of Microsoft of builds with 8 years old
EDIT: I know what must peoples in this forum have this build and others, but, i don't know why, not leak these. These peoples need think in our community, and, what the interesting of Microsoft of builds with 8 years old
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Seeing as several builds have similar bitmaps that were shoddily edited using paint, this is not proof of the build being faked.
edit: Due to how the poll question was worded, I accidentally clicked No. Disregard the poll results, or subtract 1 from No and add 1 to Yes.
edit: Due to how the poll question was worded, I accidentally clicked No. Disregard the poll results, or subtract 1 from No and add 1 to Yes.
16 years of BA experience; I refurbish old electronics, and archive diskettes with a KryoFlux. My posting history is 16 years of educated speculation and autism.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
I agreed with someones who say that maybe screenshot is a fake one, and the build exist, but however I can't still believe why Microsoft edit its images, when they own brands, and all brand's resources, also we must consider that the file in that time 100% have been saved in multi-layer image container like PSD or something else, but changing the letters in that type of files can be done in seconds, - very easier and faster then overwriting textures in Paint or some other similar software.
@Hounsell, also your old discovery is very strange.
@Hounsell, also your old discovery is very strange.
Every box with any belongings in it is just Isus's theft from ŽL.
- pizzaboy192
- Posts: 2688
- Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 3:25 am
- Location: Earth.
- Contact:
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Why waste time editing a logo for a pre-release build when slapping a new set of letters over an old set works well enough? They were planning on replacing the resources anyway, so they weren't going to bother creating a whole new logo just yet.maxtorix wrote:I agreed with someones who say that maybe screenshot is a fake one, and the build exist, but however I can't still believe why Microsoft edit its images, when they own brands, and all brand's resources, also we must consider that the file in that time 100% have been saved in multi-layer image container like PSD or something else, but changing the letters in that type of files can be done in seconds, - very easier and faster then overwriting textures in Paint or some other similar software.
@Hounsell, also your old discovery is very strange.
-
hounsell
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Because often, especially in the bad old days, the task may have ended up in a developers hands, not a designers. This is especially true for earlier builds, where designers would have been busy with UI prototyping, and the code was unlikely to be seen outside of MS and the closest of partners. They would have gone for a simple fix in the software they were familiar with, and they probably won't have known where the raw resources were stored anyway, if they had access at all.maxtorix wrote:I agreed with someones who say that maybe screenshot is a fake one, and the build exist, but however I can't still believe why Microsoft edit its images, when they own brands, and all brand's resources, also we must consider that the file in that time 100% have been saved in multi-layer image container like PSD or something else, but changing the letters in that type of files can be done in seconds, - very easier and faster then overwriting textures in Paint or some other similar software.
@Hounsell, also your old discovery is very strange.
-
WinPC
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Here is the screenshot of a perfectly real build of Windows Server 2003 for x86-64 systems (back when 64-bit computing was in its infancy), where the product logo shown within the About Windows dialog box was also edited in much the same way.
In this screenshot here, you can see how the "AMD 64" portion was obviously added in Paint, even despite being 100% authentic:
On that basis alone, I would say that it's perfectly plausible for Microsoft to have edited the About Windows dialog box in that way for something as experimental as an early 64-bit build of Windows, or the Build 5001 of Longhorn that you posted about.
We're talking about something that is only being compiled to allow the development team to get back on track, and not something that is actually intended to reflect what the product was intended to be in the first place, so I think that we should expect much more of those unusual characteristics that obviously wouldn't have happened otherwise, if it wasn't for the particular stage of development being highly experimental as it was.
Also, hounsell, you're correct, it's also quite possible that this build was released to the developers themselves, yet not actually available to the designers, so it's also very likely that the developers simply edited the bitmaps just enough to be able to identify it as a build of Longhorn.
In this screenshot here, you can see how the "AMD 64" portion was obviously added in Paint, even despite being 100% authentic:
On that basis alone, I would say that it's perfectly plausible for Microsoft to have edited the About Windows dialog box in that way for something as experimental as an early 64-bit build of Windows, or the Build 5001 of Longhorn that you posted about.
We're talking about something that is only being compiled to allow the development team to get back on track, and not something that is actually intended to reflect what the product was intended to be in the first place, so I think that we should expect much more of those unusual characteristics that obviously wouldn't have happened otherwise, if it wasn't for the particular stage of development being highly experimental as it was.
Also, hounsell, you're correct, it's also quite possible that this build was released to the developers themselves, yet not actually available to the designers, so it's also very likely that the developers simply edited the bitmaps just enough to be able to identify it as a build of Longhorn.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
//We are Amanda~
using Amanda.Carolina;
using Amanda.Carolina;
- pizzaboy192
- Posts: 2688
- Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 3:25 am
- Location: Earth.
- Contact:
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
The conversation for deciding to do this must have been fun...
Dev1: We need a way to help us know when we're loading our new builds.
Dev2: I'll talk to design tomorrow about new logos.
Dev1: No time for that. Do something quick.
Dev2: Like... open the old bitmap and play with it in Paint?
Dev1: yeah, but don't put more than a few second isn't it. Paint it all black if you have to.
Dev2: sounds good. <paints a few letters on the logo> Good?
Dev1: PERFECT. Go back to work.
Dev1: We need a way to help us know when we're loading our new builds.
Dev2: I'll talk to design tomorrow about new logos.
Dev1: No time for that. Do something quick.
Dev2: Like... open the old bitmap and play with it in Paint?
Dev1: yeah, but don't put more than a few second isn't it. Paint it all black if you have to.
Dev2: sounds good. <paints a few letters on the logo> Good?
Dev1: PERFECT. Go back to work.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Laziness runs in every individual, every family, every COMPANY. Why should Microsoft be an exception to that simple rule?
-
tonychau77
- Donator
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:34 am
- Location: British Hong Kong
- Contact:
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
I don't think Microsoft is a lazy company. Look at all those well made wallpapers and winvers, you know there are great graphic designers in Microsoft. That ugly winver and wallpaper do not seem to be made by Microsoft. Moreover, there are no bulls in other Longhorn builds.Boris Kuit wrote:Laziness runs in every individual, every family, every COMPANY. Why should Microsoft be an exception to that simple rule?
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
And also it doesn't mean for final build
Then need something quick to rebuild and then back porting some good features from pre reset code
Then need something quick to rebuild and then back porting some good features from pre reset code
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
WRONG. If Microsoft spent $1000 to find a good image that would be used internally for 4 weeks, that would be stupid beyond stupid. If an employee spent a day finding an image instead of doing their job, the boss will fire him. Especially after MS wasted a lot of money flushing Longhorn down the toilet. These builds are never to be published in the first place.Boris Kuit wrote:Laziness runs in every individual, every family, every COMPANY. Why should Microsoft be an exception to that simple rule?
Something like this is probably done by an employee who's on break and decided to do something creative to remind himself it's not XP. Then the team found it cool and put it into the build.
MS and every productive company would only spend sometime to make something pretty if it's for a release. Like 5048.
Re: Longhorn build 5001 is FAKE!
Both the build and the screens are real.
Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi