Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wise?
- SlyRedFox_MKUltra
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:10 pm
- Location: Missouri, USA
- Contact:
Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wise?
Dear BetaArchive,
Which build had more features, more options, etc. in your opinion? 4008, 4029, or 4039? Or if you know 4028 that too... Wondering because features are important to me and I am going to boot multiple OSes later this year...
Thank you.
Which build had more features, more options, etc. in your opinion? 4008, 4029, or 4039? Or if you know 4028 that too... Wondering because features are important to me and I am going to boot multiple OSes later this year...
Thank you.
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
I think, 4039 (Milestone 6):SlyRedFox_MKUltra wrote:Dear BetaArchive,
Which build had more features, more options, etc. in your opinion? 4008, 4029, or 4039? Or if you know 4028 that too... Wondering because features are important to me and I am going to boot multiple OSes later this year...
Thank you.
- one of the last builds with Plex theme
- first build to include working Aero
- has Phodeo feature
etc.
However 4039 is also the one of the most unstable Longhorn builds.
P.S> Each of pre-reset builds is somewhat unique and interesting.
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
If you want stability, then you should avoid pre-reset longhorn completely,except for maybe build 3718. Pre reset builds had an explorer memory leak, caused by the sidebar, as well as WinFS memory leak, both can be disabled, but if you want them, you'll have to face with memory leaks(even 4074's explorer can easily reach 100MB usage, in some cases it can even reach 200MB), but they're also kinda unstable. Post reset builds like 5048 are far more stable and don't have memory leaks. There's a reason why longhorn was reset.
Of those builds, I think 4008 is most stable, but lacks many features. Most interesting is definetly 4039, but it's also most unstable. When you're running on real hw, it's always stability that's most important and not the look/features/etc.
You could also try 4011 or 4015, those both have nice DCE effects that can be enabled.
Of those builds, I think 4008 is most stable, but lacks many features. Most interesting is definetly 4039, but it's also most unstable. When you're running on real hw, it's always stability that's most important and not the look/features/etc.
You could also try 4011 or 4015, those both have nice DCE effects that can be enabled.
Last edited by ovctvct on Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:19 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
4008 is a bit boring and unfinished in some areas, like in Windows Explorer and the login screen for example is still the XP styled one. 4029 is way better in terms of features and look. 4039 is the most interesting of those three builds, it's more polished than build 4029 and includes hidden features like Glass and 3D View. However, all of those builds are unstable and feature the same annoying things like memory leaks, random crashes etc.
- yourepicfailure
- Donator
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:40 pm
- Location: Lufthansa DC-10
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
And you all missed one of the most stable and useful 4xxx builds: 4033.
It is the middle-ground between 4029 and 4039. Its explorer has a much lower capacity for memory leaks.
The build is also considerably fast as well.
It is the middle-ground between 4029 and 4039. Its explorer has a much lower capacity for memory leaks.
The build is also considerably fast as well.
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
For me was the build 4028 more stable back in 2007. I have used BOFH memory leak fix and it worked fine afterwards.yourepicfailure wrote:And you all missed one of the most stable and useful 4xxx builds: 4033.
It is the middle-ground between 4029 and 4039. Its explorer has a much lower capacity for memory leaks.
The build is also considerably fast as well.
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
I actually found 4033 to be more stable than 4074... and leaks memory much less.Kobi wrote:For me was the build 4028 more stable back in 2007. I have used BOFH memory leak fix and it worked fine afterwards.yourepicfailure wrote:And you all missed one of the most stable and useful 4xxx builds: 4033.
It is the middle-ground between 4029 and 4039. Its explorer has a much lower capacity for memory leaks.
The build is also considerably fast as well.
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
you guys act as if 4028/29 are defective
they are both much stable than any 403x builds
they both contain 3D and carousel file view
and they both contain avalon animations on system dialogs
granted 4039 has phodeo and nice showcase of both Plexi-Glass skins
but controling this build is a suicide
they are both much stable than any 403x builds
they both contain 3D and carousel file view
and they both contain avalon animations on system dialogs
granted 4039 has phodeo and nice showcase of both Plexi-Glass skins
but controling this build is a suicide
- yourepicfailure
- Donator
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:40 pm
- Location: Lufthansa DC-10
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
However if one was to run builds on actual hardware, 403x and 404x have better hardware support.LuLu wrote:you guys act as if 4028/29 are defective
they are both much stable than any 403x builds
Also try getting a 200mb explorer memory leak on 4033. I easily reach that with 4029 with four windows open. With .net features disabled and explorer tweaked, the memory leaks obviously go down.
4028 is a different story. It is faster and more stable than 4029, but still yields hardware troubles especially around ACPI.
I do agree, 4039 is frustrating even on far capable modern hardware.
Last edited by yourepicfailure on Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
In fact, it's odd that 4015 even tends not to leak so much RAM, it's quite hard to get to 100MB, while with 4074 you can even get over 200MB with MILDesktop and MILExplorer stuff enabled, sometimes even 500MB after a while. I do believe 4033 is very light on RAM, and it's also fast.
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
it would be nice to know what exactly is choking 4039
both on startup and while "working"
both on startup and while "working"
- SlyRedFox_MKUltra
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:10 pm
- Location: Missouri, USA
- Contact:
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
I installed 4039 on a school computer and it worked fine if you don't use it for very long (Shut it down after 2-3 hours). Don't know if it was the hardware or not...
- SlyRedFox_MKUltra
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:10 pm
- Location: Missouri, USA
- Contact:
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
It doesn't choke as much as people say, but it is likely due to the fact that it relies on one of the earliest betas on WinPE.LuLu wrote:it would be nice to know what exactly is choking 4039
both on startup and while "working"
- yourepicfailure
- Donator
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:40 pm
- Location: Lufthansa DC-10
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
Corrected you there. Also, the .Net components in explorer also cause a lot of the problems.SlyRedFox_MKUltra wrote:but it is likely due to the fact that it relies on one of the earliest betas of WinFS.
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!
- SlyRedFox_MKUltra
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:10 pm
- Location: Missouri, USA
- Contact:
Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi
yourepicfailure wrote:Corrected you there. Also, the .Net components in explorer also cause a lot of the problems.SlyRedFox_MKUltra wrote:but it is likely due to the fact that it relies on one of the earliest betas of WinFS.
Thanks! Got them mixed up.