BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 59d, 23h, 26m | CPU: 13% | MEM: 5046MB of 12191MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Forum rules


Please read the following rules before posting a download request in this area:

1. Don't post a request if you have under 10 posts as stated on the front page. If you do anyway, it will be deleted without further notice. This also applies to other members: If you see a request by someone with less than 10 posts and it hasn't been deleted yet, please don't reply to it.
2. Don't request for warez or any copyrighted software. Only betas (no matter how old or new) and finals of operating systems and applications that are at least 10 years old and therefore classified as abandonware are allowed to be uploaded to and shared on the BetaArchive FTP server.
3. If you have your own FTP server where you'd like other members to upload what you're looking for to, please don't post its login details in any open forum as that will probably lead to abuse. Post the login details in the Private Servers section instead.
4. Check that we don't already have the file on our FTP servers. If you don't have access to the FTP servers then ask someone who has (a moderator for example).


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 PostPost subject: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:05 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
Update:

This thread is full of pointless posts and debates so you probably don't want to read everything as it is a waste of time. Basically I and gus33000 worked out the original timestamps of Neptune build 5111 after some debate and I rebuilt the ISO with CDIMAGE 2.27 using parameters Microsoft used for building Windows 2000 ISOs. I had 2 attempts at rebuilding the ISO and all links are now updated to the most original copy of Neptune build 5111. My rebuilt ISO is now on the FTP.

This new ISO of Neptune 5111 have all timestamps corrected as timestamps got messed up by daylight saving and timezone change in the previous ISO uploaded by Overdoze. Proof for the genuineness of timestamps here.

Download link: https://mega.nz/#!RFF0ySAQ!idfm3eW7kPZW ... A6eIPwJpZQ


Because this ISO is the most original ISO of Neptune 5111 currently available, it does feature the 444-day timebomb. You can patch this ISO to remove timebomb and below are the bytes to change:
Code:
80 C1 09 00 → 00 00 00 00


Since it is very hard to get VMware Tools to install and you will get VGA with 16 colors in VMware without the SVGA driver, here is the driver: https://mega.nz/#!8F83gQQS!EYZaG2Di1Tc8 ... LhRlzn9aYg

Neptune installs fine with my rebuilt ISO and SVGA driver in VMware:

Image



The original post:

ComputerHunter on Thu Jan 09, 2020 wrote:
I don't think the copy of Neptune 5111 on the FTP is professionally made because of the following reasons:

  1. Microsoft never used ImgBurn to create disc images or to burn them to CD, highly unlikely they will for this build.
    Code:
    Volume: NEPTUNE_M2
    VolumeSet: UNDEFINED
    Application: IMGBURN V2.5.8.0 - THE ULTIMATE IMAGE BURNER!
    Created: 2018-10-24 23:18:48 (UTC)

  2. Some directories are dated 2018, nobody is going to notice them.
    Code:
    X:\I386>dir /ad
     Volume in drive X is NEPTUNE_M2
     Volume Serial Number is C255-A604

     Directory of X:\I386

    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          .
    10/24/2018  11:18 PM    <DIR>          ..                     <----
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          COMPDATA
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          LANG
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          SYSTEM32
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          UNIPROC
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          WIN9XMIG
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          WIN9XUPG
    12/10/1999  12:31 PM    <DIR>          WINNTUPG
                   0 File(s)              0 bytes
                   9 Dir(s)               0 bytes free

  3. Timestamps are wrong, 7 hours behind what they should be (possibly caused by zipping, unzipping, NTFS to FAT, one country to another and etc) then totally messed up by daylight saving.

So I decided to use CDIMAGE 2.27 to rebuild the ISO with correct timestamps. I set my timezone to UTC -8, corrected the timestamps and rebuilt the ISO with the same parameter Microsoft used for Windows 2000. I used NEPTUNE M2 as volume label rather than NEPTUNE_M2 because iapx432 said that is the original label.

Here it is: https://mega.nz/#!RFF0ySAQ!idfm3eW7kPZW ... A6eIPwJpZQ

Since it is very hard to get VMware Tools to install and you will get VGA with 16 colors in VMware without the SVGA driver, here is the driver: https://mega.nz/#!8F83gQQS!EYZaG2Di1Tc8 ... LhRlzn9aYg

Neptune installs fine with my rebuilt ISO and SVGA driver in VMware:
Image


Updated 01/12/2020 - Rebuilt ISO with correct timestamps and updated download link.


Last edited by ComputerHunter on Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:53 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:24 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
Why have you changed the timestamps? I'm fine with everything you did but that. Neptune at the time was a patch done on top of the current RC build of Windows 2000, it's normal for the timestamps to not be uniform. By doing what you did you just removed very important pieces of information that were genuine. It is normal for the timezone to change that's dependent on many factors one of which being your computer timezone and the timezone used on the computer that made the image at MS.. Also keep in mind that 2128 pressed has different timestamps than 2128 non pressed because the dates are using the date of the ISO manufacturing and not the build compile. Neptune was most likely stored on build shares..

Edit:

"there is no guarantee the timestamps for directories are accurate"

it's a weird coincidence then for a leak happening in 2000 to have perfectly matching timestamps for 1999.

Edit 2: even if your theory of the timestamps being wrong is true it's an even bigger mistake to make assumptions on top of that which could lead to even more inaccurate timestamps and even more loss of information.

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Last edited by gus33000 on Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:27 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
Have you downloaded my ISO? Timestamps are just corrected, not touched to be the same.

Timestamps for directories are from Overdoze's ISO.


Last edited by ComputerHunter on Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:30 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:33 pm

Posts
2030

Location
Czechia
ComputerHunter wrote:
I don't think the copy of Neptune 5111 on the FTP is professionally made (...)

Nobody even claimed it was. I thought it was pretty clear and transparent that it is recreated from the original folder dump.

God knows whether this even comes from a CD, considering it's pretty much 5111 stuff slapped on top of 2128. Doesn't really sound like a thing that would come out as an output of an ISO build script.

_________________
AlphaBeta, stop brainwashing me immediately!

Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:31 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
ComputerHunter wrote:
Have you downloaded my ISO? Timestamps are just corrected, not touched to be the same.

Timestamps for directories are from Overdoze's ISO.


I would be a fool to claim things about your ISO and choices being wrong if I didn't download your ISO.

Image

I have genuine issues with the timestamp changes with valid points. See my edits above.

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:34 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
AlphaBeta wrote:
Nobody even claimed it was. I thought it was pretty clear and transparent that it is recreated from the original folder dump.


I thought everything needs to be processed to the best state possible before getting put up on the FTP...

AlphaBeta wrote:
God knows whether this even comes from a CD, considering it's pretty much 5111 stuff slapped on top of 2128.


Did you read nttalk-5111.txt? If that person really owns the disc, then it is pretty clear it came on a disc.

gus33000 wrote:
I have genuine issues with the timestamp changes with valid points. See my edits above.


Yeah, right since some files came from 2128, you can calculate the correct date and time with a copy of the 2128 ISO by comparing timestamps of matching files.


Last edited by ComputerHunter on Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:38 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
ComputerHunter wrote:
AlphaBeta wrote:
Nobody even claimed it was. I thought it was pretty clear and transparent that it is recreated from the original folder dump.


I thought everything needs to be processed to the best state possible before getting put up on the FTP...

AlphaBeta wrote:
God knows whether this even comes from a CD, considering it's pretty much 5111 stuff slapped on top of 2128.


Did you read nttalk-5111.txt? If that person really owns the disc, then it is pretty clear it came on a disc.


implying that disc even contained 5111.*1* and was exactly the same release.

ComputerHunter wrote:
gus33000 wrote:
I have genuine issues with the timestamp changes with valid points. See my edits above.


Yeah, right since some files came from 2128, you can calculate the correct date and time with a copy of the 2128 ISO by comparing files.


Again, you are making the mistake of comparing with a pressed copy of 2128 you haven't fully read my explanations.

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:41 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:33 pm

Posts
2030

Location
Czechia
ComputerHunter wrote:
Did you read nttalk-5111.txt? If that person really owns the disc, then it is pretty clear it came on a disc.

Yes, I have. It's pretty easy to print stuff on a CD, so how should that convince me that the disc in question is even real?

_________________
AlphaBeta, stop brainwashing me immediately!

Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:42 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
If you look at the timestamp of those 2128 files, they're have their timestamps touched which means they are from the pressed copy of 2182 (otherwise those files will have different timestamps). Also, you can revert this easily. Timestamps from each of the 3 releases are different, by a few hours and how do you know which one is original?

AlphaBeta wrote:
Yes, I have. It's pretty easy to print stuff on a CD, so how should that convince me that the disc in question is even real?


Read the Neptune page on your wiki... It did not question the authenticity of the disc...


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:45 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
ComputerHunter wrote:
If you look at the timestamp of those 2128 files, they're have their timestamps touched which means they are from the pressed copy of 2182 (otherwise those files will have different timestamps). Also, you can revert this easily. Timestamps from each of the 3 releases are different, by a few hours and how do you know which one is original?


That makes no sense. Microsoft has pressed discs made off build shares in IDW build folders. Discs will have different timestamps than these folders. Neptune was built with an IDW build folder, not a pressed disc. Pressed discs will always have uniform timestamps and different than the release due to arbitrary parameters being passed to the cdimage util by the cd image making script.

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:48 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
I know that but look, the chances that the unified timestamps are different is low. All 2128 files have the same timestamp, meaning they're from the disc, with the -t parameter.

Lets stop arguing... If you think they're wrong, reverting the timestamps is easy not to mention there are 3 copies with 3 different timestamps. We need one timestamp that is most likely original which is this one.


Last edited by ComputerHunter on Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 12:52 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:33 pm

Posts
2030

Location
Czechia
ComputerHunter wrote:
Read the Neptune page on your wiki... It did not question the authenticity of the disc...

Just because I am an admin on BetaWiki does not mean I necessarily have to agree with everything that's written there...

_________________
AlphaBeta, stop brainwashing me immediately!

Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 1:04 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
ComputerHunter wrote:
I know that but look, the chances that the unified timestamps are different is low. All 2128 files have the same timestamp, meaning they're from the disc, with the -t parameter.

Lets stop arguing... If you think they're wrong, reverting the timestamps is easy not to mention there are 3 copies with 3 different timestamps. We need one timestamp that is most likely original which is this one.


Then why not just keep the BA copy? In case of doubt no change is better than changes making it worse.

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 3:26 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed May 29, 2019 5:36 pm

Posts
92

Location
Somewhere near you, UTC+3

Favourite OS
Windows 3.2
Why should I download an ISO of Neptune 5111 that is no different than the copy here?

_________________
Quote:
You have never seen Windows like this!
Free Windows 3.2!
Shareware featuring an upgrade for preexisting Windows 3.1 users and BONUS PACK
Distributed freely by PC World. March 1996


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 5:17 pm 
Reply with quote
Administrator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Feb 12, 2008 5:28 pm

Posts
7972
Considering that _no one_ has yet provided an original copy of Neptune it doesn't really matter about the time stamps as long as the content is as unaltered as possible. ComputerHunter, thanks for your effort, but unless you can prove your time stamps are more genuine to what Microsoft created than any of the other 4039 other recompiles of this build then it doesn't really matter at this point, all we get now is one more recompile of this build that will spread around and confuse everyone.

_________________
Image
Official guidelines: The Definitive Guide to BetaArchive :: Abandonware
Tools: Alcohol120% (Portable) :: DiscImageCreator
Listings: BetaArchive Database (beta)
Channels: Discord :: Twitter


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:33 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
gus33000 wrote:
Then why not just keep the BA copy? In case of doubt no change is better than changes making it worse.

I have proof the current copy is not original and the timestamps are wrong. Files originated from build 2128 have unified timestamps meaning they're from the pressed disc (with the -t parameter) and they are 7 hours behind the timestamp of the 2128 ISO. Microsoft basically put Neptune files onto a 2128 disc and if the 2128 files are 7 hours behind, the Neptune files are as well.

Microsoft always make ISOs with GMT -8 (E0) and the timezone of the current ISO on the FTP did not use that which basically proves the timezone wrong (even if the timestamps looks the same and they don't here). Get a copy of the build 2128 ISO and check, they used GMT -8 as well (and my ISO). Same timestamp (for identical files) and same timezone is far better than wrong timestamp and wrong timezone. Do you have proof this is worse? If there is no proof this is worse and I have proof the timestamps are wrong for the current ISO, why should we keep the current one?

Image

I don't think changes will make it worse because I firmly believe the timestamp and timezone of my ISO is more original (because of the build 2128 files) and they can be reverted easily. Again, the current copy is clearly unprofessionally made with wrong timestamp and timezone.

Winins wrote:
Why should I download an ISO of Neptune 5111 that is no different than the copy here?

Actually there are differences. Check the header of the current ISO and my ISO (one made with ImgBurn and the other with CDIMAGE). The timestamps of the current ISO are wrong as well, even have directories dated 2018. The files are no different but if you want to preserve something, more professionally made and closer to original is better.

mrpijey wrote:
Considering that _no one_ has yet provided an original copy of Neptune it doesn't really matter about the time stamps as long as the content is as unaltered as possible. ComputerHunter, thanks for your effort, but unless you can prove your time stamps are more genuine to what Microsoft created than any of the other 4039 other recompiles of this build then it doesn't really matter at this point, all we get now is one more recompile of this build that will spread around and confuse everyone.

Yeah, so timestamps doesn't matter and mine was made with the tool Microsoft used to make all other ISOs from the same era, wouldn't it be more original (than an ISO made with ImgBurn)? I also have proof the timestamps are more original because of the build 2128 files with unified timestamps.

Even you don't care about timestamps, it is still more original and the files are the same. It wouldn't hurt that much to just replace the current one with an ISO more professional made and more "Microsoft". When you want to revert it, extract the files, set them 7 hours back and recreate the ISO with ImgBurn.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:40 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
ComputerHunter - Argument 1 wrote:
gus33000 wrote:
Then why not just keep the BA copy? In case of doubt no change is better than changes making it worse.

I have proof the current copy is not original and the timestamps are wrong. Files originated from build 2128 have unified timestamps meaning they're from the pressed disc (with the -t parameter) and they are 7 hours behind the timestamp of the 2128 ISO. Microsoft basically put Neptune files onto a 2128 disc and if the 2128 files are 7 hours behind, the Neptune files are as well.

Microsoft always make ISOs with GMT -8 (E0) and the timezone of the current ISO on the FTP did not use that which basically proves the timezone wrong (even if the timestamps looks the same and they don't here). Get a copy of the build 2128 ISO and check, they used GMT -8 as well (and my ISO). Same timestamp (for identical files) and same timezone is far better than wrong timestamp and wrong timezone. Do you have proof this is worse? If there is no proof this is worse and I have proof the timestamps are wrong for the current ISO, why should we keep the current one?

Image

I don't think changes will make it worse because I firmly believe the timestamp and timezone of my ISO is more original (because of the build 2128 files) and they can be reverted easily. Again, the current copy is clearly unprofessionally made with wrong timestamp and timezone.



You really didn't understand what I explained earlier or missed most of it, so I'll explain again my explanation condensed in this single reply.
I am absolutely not arguing over the fact MS used these timestamp policies with CDIMAGE for pressed discs. But you're making a lot of assumptions here, a lot.
You are basing your assumption over the fact neptune was a pressed disc. Do you have any source to provide for that claim? Microsoft at the time selfhosted builds by installing them from a build share named:

Code:
\\ntbuilds\release\usa\latest.tst\x86\


people simply ran the setup files provided here from the share and installed the build over the network for self-hosting. Most NT 5 leaks happened with people copying builds from here and they are not extracted pressed disc images; pressed discs get made from these shares using arbitrary timestamps from the time the disc was wished to be made.

Neptune includes a one touch setup utility which has been proven to only work from a you guessed it, network share. There is no proof this build was on a pressed disc to begin with and isn't just an IDW dump from

Code:
\\ntbuilds\release\usa\latest.tst\x86\


More-over, when building pressed disc images, Microsoft makes all file timestamps the same, by making them uniform. Original discs will tend to have uniform timestamps, again, Neptune doesn't fall into that category proving once again that there's no proof it was on a pressed disc to begin with.

Moreover you may also start claiming, but there's a disc, as an image of it leaked. There is 0 proof that the picture of the disc is either:
  • Real
  • The same build
  • The same release
  • The exact source of this build leak from PWA

Without any proof for these 4 concerns I have I will find it hard to believe it in the first place.

About your claim of the ISO featuring "2018 timestamps", that timestamp is for the root folder meaning it is the timestamp of when the image was made in whatever tool was used to get it made and is not a folder timestamp.

ComputerHunter - Argument 2 wrote:
Winins wrote:
Why should I download an ISO of Neptune 5111 that is no different than the copy here?

Actually there are differences. Check the header of the current ISO and my ISO (one made with ImgBurn and the other with CDIMAGE). The timestamps of the current ISO are wrong as well, even have directories dated 2018. The files are no different but if you want to preserve something, more professionally made and closer to original is better.


See reply above, paragraph 5.

ComputerHunter - Argument 3 wrote:
mrpijey wrote:
Considering that _no one_ has yet provided an original copy of Neptune it doesn't really matter about the time stamps as long as the content is as unaltered as possible. ComputerHunter, thanks for your effort, but unless you can prove your time stamps are more genuine to what Microsoft created than any of the other 4039 other recompiles of this build then it doesn't really matter at this point, all we get now is one more recompile of this build that will spread around and confuse everyone.

Yeah, so timestamps doesn't matter and mine was made with the tool Microsoft used to make all other ISOs from the same era, wouldn't it be more original (than an ISO made with ImgBurn)? I also have proof the timestamps are more original because of the build 2128 files with unified timestamps.

Even you don't care about timestamps, it is still more original and the files are the same. It wouldn't hurt that much to just replace the current one with an ISO more professional made and more "Microsoft". When you want to revert it, extract the files, set them 7 hours back and recreate the ISO with ImgBurn.


It is not more original than any other copy, unless you have the disc at home and you are willing to provide an mdf dump out of it, it is not original and will never be taken as such, and this by no way makes it more original than the existing ISOs we have. The contents are original, but the ISO, surely not.

Edit: I'll make it clear, I'm not against you providing a better ISO made using CDIMAGE, but if you're willing to do that, undo your timestamp changes as a whole. I don't see why we would need to be the ones undoing it when you can just not change them in the first place.

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:25 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
gus33000 wrote:
More-over, when building pressed disc images, Microsoft makes all file timestamps the same, by making them uniform. Original discs will tend to have uniform timestamps, again, Neptune doesn't fall into that category proving once again that there's no proof it was on a pressed disc to begin with.

Ok, you probably understood me wrong. I did not assume Neptune 5111 was shipped on a pressed disc.

All files from build 2128 have uniform timestamp and that means they're from a pressed disc, right? If they are 7 hours back what about the Neptune 5111 files ? I am not saying 5111 is from a pressed disc but the build 2128 files are (since they all have the same timestamp).

gus33000 wrote:
About your claim of the ISO featuring "2018 timestamps", that timestamp is for the root folder meaning it is the timestamp of when the image was made in whatever tool was used to get it made and is not a folder timestamp.


Yes it is a folder. When you create a folder, it also create 2 sub-directories (. and ..) with the same modification date as that folder but when you add a folder to an ISO, the timestamp of .. becomes the timestamp of its parent folder and in this case, the CD root was modified in 2018 which is basically impossible for an operating system from 1999. . and .. also have timestamps and they are actual folders but most people simply neglect the existence of them because you rarely see them.

Image

gus33000 wrote:
It is not more original than any other copy, unless you have the disc at home and you are willing to provide an mdf dump out of it, it is not original and will never be taken as such, and this by no way makes it more original than the existing ISOs we have. The contents are original, but the ISO, surely not.

I know that but it is more original than the current copy because it was made with the proper tool (not something as stupid as ImgBurn), its timestamps are correct (in my opinion) and it does not contain folders (I386\.., yep it is a folder) dated 2018.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:37 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:14 pm

Posts
1237
What you are offering provides little to no benefit compared to the current online copy. You may have created an image that's closer to how a Microsoft release would've looked, but functionally there is no difference. A better image would make sense only if you changed the contents that actually matter, instead of metadata that we never had an original of in first place.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 12:14 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:33 pm

Posts
2030

Location
Czechia
ComputerHunter wrote:
gus33000 wrote:
Then why not just keep the BA copy? In case of doubt no change is better than changes making it worse.

I have proof the current copy is not original and the timestamps are wrong.

But nor is yours. If anything is worth preserving, it's the original folder dump by PWA precisely to prevent such dramas.

_________________
AlphaBeta, stop brainwashing me immediately!

Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:51 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed May 29, 2019 5:36 pm

Posts
92

Location
Somewhere near you, UTC+3

Favourite OS
Windows 3.2
I don't care about timestamps, I just want the build, and the PWA leak does it for me.

_________________
Quote:
You have never seen Windows like this!
Free Windows 3.2!
Shareware featuring an upgrade for preexisting Windows 3.1 users and BONUS PACK
Distributed freely by PC World. March 1996


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 7:39 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:37 am

Posts
512
We do not have the PWA leak. Only an ISO of it made by ImgBurn with incorrect timestamp.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 8:51 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:24 am

Posts
500

Location
Bordeaux, sometimes in Paris, France, maybe also in R.W

Favourite OS
8056
ComputerHunter - Argument 4 wrote:
Ok, you probably understood me wrong. I did not assume Neptune 5111 was shipped on a pressed disc.

All files from build 2128 have uniform timestamp and that means they're from a pressed disc, right? If they are 7 hours back what about the Neptune 5111 files ? I am not saying 5111 is from a pressed disc but the build 2128 files are (since they all have the same timestamp).

If we both agree over the fact 5111 was not a pressed disc why are you so determined to make it look like one then?
Also what proof do you even have to back up the claim that it was made using 2128 files from the pressed disc and not the network share?

The only thing that would have the merit of being preserved now is a media_unpack.rar with just a dump of PWA files.

ComputerHunter - Argument 5 wrote:
Yes it is a folder. When you create a folder, it also create 2 sub-directories (. and ..) with the same modification date as that folder but when you add a folder to an ISO, the timestamp of .. becomes the timestamp of its parent folder and in this case, the CD root was modified in 2018 which is basically impossible for an operating system from 1999. . and .. also have timestamps and they are actual folders but most people simply neglect the existence of them because you rarely see them.

And that happened precisely because that's the date of when the iso was made, .. links back to the cd root........

ComputerHunter - Argument 6 wrote:
I know that but it is more original than the current copy because it was made with the proper tool (not something as stupid as ImgBurn), its timestamps are correct (in my opinion) and it does not contain folders (I386\.., yep it is a folder) dated 2018.

If it's only your opinion why do you keep saying after this message that for sure the timestamps are incorrect?
And no, there's no such thing as more or less original, it's either original or not.

I'm also sure ImgBurn devs will appreciate people calling their software "stupid" ImgBurn is a good software, unless you have claims to advance as to why you think it's "stupid".

Edit: Taken from your nttalk text file and your ISO, if the timestamps aren't original can you explain this issue?

ImageImage

_________________
[PBT] ProtoBetaTest: A run through Windows Phone history by looking at prototypes
[Project] WDPSL: Disk Preparer and Setup Launcher - [How-To] Spoof any phone for updates packages or urls
[Fun] Office Lime: The best commercial product from Microsoft


Last edited by gus33000 on Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:16 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 9:51 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:40 pm

Posts
1143

Location
Flying high in a DC10

Favourite OS
NT3.X Family
My question for you ComputerHunter is why you believe your rebuild will help the preservation community. You have stated it is "more professionally made" but not why and how you think it will help the preservation community. To myself and the other individuals seeing this, again this repack is now one of many non-original repacks of this build.

Which really offers little value other than having used a different ISO maker and modified timestamps.
Just because you used the "proper" iso maker doesn't make it any more original than not. I can cab compress files, append the right .**_ extension and use MS iso maker when producing an i386 repack of Longhorn with changed timestamps. That does not make it the original "master" install image generated from compiler output for testing and production of the final wim install. It is a folder dump, almost like what the Neptune images are based off of. Not original.

Instead you reiterate that your repack is better than everything else because you spent some time changing timestamps and rebuilding the iso. It isn't original, nor will it ever be. It is based off a non-original image. Which in turn was possibly not based off of the original media.

_________________
Quote:
"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off"


Last edited by yourepicfailure on Sat Jan 11, 2020 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: [OFFER] Rebuilt Microsoft Neptune build 5111.1        Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 9:52 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed May 29, 2019 5:36 pm

Posts
92

Location
Somewhere near you, UTC+3

Favourite OS
Windows 3.2
ComputerHunter wrote:
We do not have the PWA leak. Only an ISO of it made by ImgBurn with incorrect timestamp.

The ISO on the FTP is based on the PWA leak though.

_________________
Quote:
You have never seen Windows like this!
Free Windows 3.2!
Shareware featuring an upgrade for preexisting Windows 3.1 users and BONUS PACK
Distributed freely by PC World. March 1996


Top  Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2020

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS