Windows NT 3.1 Build 1.196 (September 1991) [Disc Scan]

[ReflectiaX]

Sadly not my disc, though I'm trying to acquire it or the build. Will keep you all abreast of if/when anything more comes of this.

As for a little background, this disc was sent to VERY select Microsoft partners back then.

[Random_User]

Sadly not my disc, though I'm trying to acquire it or the build.

I am confused. Did you receive the scan from a third party?

[ReflectiaX]

Sadly not my disc, though I'm trying to acquire it or the build.

I am confused. Did you receive the scan from a third party?

Yes. The person who owns that disc.

[louisw3]

Interesting looking, it certainly doesn't look like any pre-release that I've seen so I guess a far more exclusive build.

[Meow_2004]

Very intresting, hope you can acquire it!

[TheWinnerCollector111]

Never seen a Microsoft disc that said "CONFIDENTIAL" in big red text like a stamp.

I hope you can get it. It says "Development Kit" so i assume its not an actual build. If we already have that build then that means that we can try out this kit on that build.

[BF10]

Never seen a Microsoft disc that said "CONFIDENTIAL" in big red text like a stamp.

I hope you can get it. It says "Development Kit" so i assume its not an actual build. If we already have that build then that means that we can try out this kit on that build.

Actually, Development Kit means that it comes with Developer Tools, like with the October 1991 build:



If we can get a copy, then we would have a build that predates the October release and give an idea of what it looks like compared to build 175.

[ReflectiaX]

For those wondering, to elaborate on BF10's reply, SDKs came with the OS on the disc back then because the disc had enough space to hold the contents of both. As the SDK and OS bits increased in size and scope over time, they were separated out to their own media.

[Overdoze]

This is definitely very cool. Hoping you can get a dump of this.

So is this now the earliest confirmed NT 3.1 release outside Microsoft? Build 175 from around August/July 1991 is only seen in a video, so I doubt it was given out to anyone.

[TheWinnerCollector111]

Never seen a Microsoft disc that said "CONFIDENTIAL" in big red text like a stamp.

I hope you can get it. It says "Development Kit" so i assume its not an actual build. If we already have that build then that means that we can try out this kit on that build.

Actually, Development Kit means that it comes with Developer Tools, like with the October 1991 build:



If we can get a copy, then we would have a build that predates the October release and give an idea of what it looks like compared to build 175.

Ah. I didn't know that. Thanks for telling me. So that means that disc would have a build not leaked before but with Developer Tools.

[Overdoze]

I imagine the contents are much like October 91, just earlier build and dev tools.

[johnlemon647]

I hope we get this beta build Windows NT 3.1. It will be oldest leaked build Windows NT 3.1 if found.

[Overdoze]

Since this build apparently has a build number, it would be interesting to see how it's stored and would give a better insight as to why it's absent in October 91.

[LarryTN7722]

Interesting! I hope you get a dump of the disc!

[DiskingRound]

The disc is beautiful.
I remember an old story from louisw3. He said, during those very early NT beta re-leaks in 2011, that in the 90s, 2000s or so he had a disc from 1991 that could have been 175, 196, October beta or 239. He lost that disk in a move and, apparnetly, still is ashamed by him throwing that disc away. From what I know, development started in 1989 of an "N-Ten" "Alpha" beta, and was almost certainly existent in 1990, I would like to see earlier builds.
I can't imagine it being drastically different from October 1991, but this means that the build number of October 1991 should be around ~209.

[LangsamSpieler]

Which Build/does have this build references to IMB OS with Microsoft, because I did read it so that Microsoft and IBM did brake his Partners in 1991 I think

[DiskingRound]

Louisw3 posted in the NT Prerelease topic of 2011 that the beta he lost xcopied itself just like the October 91 beta and that in many places, it was called NT OS/2. It is this latter piece of info that makes me judge his build was earlier than October 91. It could have been this one, but I'm not sure.

[LangsamSpieler]

I’m pretty sure, that older Builds than 175 are exsisting, because I did read on the German Wikipedia, NT 3.1 was NT/OS 2 as Codename, and it was early 1989. I can only think a Build Number under 100 can exsisting

[louisw3]

The disc is beautiful.
I remember an old story from louisw3. He said, during those very early NT beta re-leaks in 2011, that in the 90s, 2000s or so he had a disc from 1991 that could have been 175, 196, October beta or 239. He lost that disk in a move and, apparnetly, still is ashamed by him throwing that disc away. From what I know, development started in 1989 of an "N-Ten" "Alpha" beta, and was almost certainly existent in 1990, I would like to see earlier builds.
I can't imagine it being drastically different from October 1991, but this means that the build number of October 1991 should be around ~209.

I didn't throw it away. It was lost. It was either the October or December 1991 disc since the images by Ken Oath looked exact like the one I remember and they installed the same way, using debug to install the bootloader, and xcopying the OS.

The 200+ builds are from later on in 1992, in late 1991 is when Windows NT made It's first public appearance at the October Comdex. It's all in the book Showstopper.

Windows NT had started out as NT OS/2. It's no secret. Go look through the leaked NT 4.0 source, specifically in the MASM source and look for cmd32.exe. There was mention of NT OS/2 already running 32 bit OS/2 Cruiser stuff from the command line. And that there was already on the way for making Windows the primary API, and time tables for how long until they could both "share the glass" for a unified environment.

Obviously there are builds prior to the October version, what is new is that they had been mastered to CD and distributed, if even limited quantities.

I had lost the disc long before there was 1tb disks or anything like that. CD's were the backup method.

[DiskingRound]

Windows NT had started out as NT OS/2. It's no secret. Go look through the leaked NT 4.0 source, specifically in the MASM source and look for cmd32.exe. There was mention of NT OS/2 already running 32 bit OS/2 Cruiser stuff from the command line. And that there was already on the way for making Windows the primary API, and time tables for how long until they could both "share the glass" for a unified environment.

There was also this razzle.ico:

BTW, this PDF: https://www.levenez.com/windows/windows.pdf
shows "Windows Alpha" from 1988, "N-Ten" from early 1989, and "NT alpha" from april 1990. Interesting

[Random_User]

Are you sure N-Ten was a prior name or codename for Windows NT? I know it was a codename for the Intel i860, and there was some speculation that that's where the name Windows NT was derived from. There was also similar speculation about WNT (the abbreviation for Windows NT) being derived from the successors to the letters in VMS, but until now I was sure that both were rumors.

[johnlemon647]

I'm pretty sure could there was NT OS/2 Alphas in 1989 possibly lack GUI might have same interface as OS/2 1.00.

[ReflectiaX]

Are you sure N-Ten was a prior name or codename for Windows NT? I know it was a codename for the Intel i860, and there was some speculation that that's where the name Windows NT was derived from. There was also similar speculation about WNT (the abbreviation for Windows NT) being derived from the successors to the letters in VMS, but until now I was sure that both were rumors.

The "N-Ten" bit (insofar as the Intel i860 being codenamed N10) is the origin of NT! Mark Lucovsky explained its origins to Paul Thurrott back in 2003 as such:

"We checked the first code pieces in around mid-December 1988," Lucovsky said, "and had a very basic system kind of booting on a simulator of the Intel i860 (which was codenamed "N-Ten") by January." In fact, this is where NT actually got its name, Lucovsky revealed, adding that the "new technology" moniker was added after the fact in a rare spurt of product marketing by the original NT team members. "Originally, we were targeting NT to the Intel i860, a RISC processor that was horribly behind schedule. Because we didn't have any i860 machines in-house to test on, we used an i860 simulator. That's why we called it NT, because it worked on the 'N-Ten.'"

[AlphaBeta]

Oh look, it's the 043d flag. I wonder whether it's also used by the OS itself or it already uses the final logo.

[DiskingRound]

Oh look, it's the 043d flag. I wonder whether it's also used by the OS itself or it already uses the final logo.

I imagine that yes. 043e is from August 26, 1991, 043d should be from a few days earlier. I cannot see it difficult for this flag to be included in the OS...