Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wise?

Discuss Windows Vista/Server 2008 to Windows 10.
Post Reply
SlyRedFox_MKUltra
User avatar
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:10 pm
Location: Missouri, USA
Contact:

Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wise?

Post by SlyRedFox_MKUltra »

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.

User5274
User avatar
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:54 pm
Location: Tula, Russia
Contact:

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by User5274 »

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.
I think, 4039 (Milestone 6):
- 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.

ovctvct
Posts: 1058
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:19 pm

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by ovctvct »

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.
Last edited by ovctvct on Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:19 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Valerio
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:04 pm

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by Valerio »

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
User avatar
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

Post by yourepicfailure »

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.
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"
Image
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!

Kobi
User avatar
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:04 pm

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by Kobi »

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.
For me was the build 4028 more stable back in 2007. I have used BOFH memory leak fix and it worked fine afterwards.
Image

ovctvct
Posts: 1058
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:19 pm

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by ovctvct »

Kobi wrote:
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.
For me was the build 4028 more stable back in 2007. I have used BOFH memory leak fix and it worked fine afterwards.
I actually found 4033 to be more stable than 4074... and leaks memory much less.

LuLu
Permanently Banned
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 5:32 am

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by LuLu »

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

yourepicfailure
User avatar
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

Post by yourepicfailure »

LuLu wrote:you guys act as if 4028/29 are defective
they are both much stable than any 403x builds
However if one was to run builds on actual hardware, 403x and 404x have better hardware support.
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"
Image
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!

ovctvct
Posts: 1058
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:19 pm

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by ovctvct »

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.

LuLu
Permanently Banned
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 5:32 am

Re: Windows Longhorn Build 4008 vs. 4029 vs. 4039 feature-wi

Post by LuLu »

it would be nice to know what exactly is choking 4039
both on startup and while "working"

SlyRedFox_MKUltra
User avatar
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

Post by SlyRedFox_MKUltra »

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
User avatar
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

Post by SlyRedFox_MKUltra »

LuLu wrote:it would be nice to know what exactly is choking 4039
both on startup and while "working"
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.

yourepicfailure
User avatar
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

Post by yourepicfailure »

SlyRedFox_MKUltra wrote:but it is likely due to the fact that it relies on one of the earliest betas of WinFS.
Corrected you there. Also, the .Net components in explorer also cause a lot of the problems.
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"
Image
You will never tear me from the grasp of the Pentium M!

SlyRedFox_MKUltra
User avatar
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

Post by SlyRedFox_MKUltra »

yourepicfailure wrote:
SlyRedFox_MKUltra wrote:but it is likely due to the fact that it relies on one of the earliest betas of WinFS.
Corrected you there. Also, the .Net components in explorer also cause a lot of the problems.

Thanks! Got them mixed up.

Post Reply