Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Discuss Windows Vista/Server 2008 to Windows 10.
Post Reply
Stef Mihai
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:06 pm

Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Stef Mihai »

Hello, :beta: Arcive users! I have encountered something very wired in Longhorn builds (both pre-reset and post-reset builds). I tried to install some <relatively> modern web browsers, as well as other types of software. All Longhorn pre-reset builds were able to support Firefox 12.0, but build 4074 jumped to Firefox 45.9.0esr and even 46.0b1! Builds after 4074 returned to Firefox 12.0. The development reset: build 3790 (if updated to SP2) can support Firefox 52.9.0esr, otherwise Firefox 12.0 will be the last. (That is very logical as this build has the number NT 5.2 so it will be recognized as Windows XP). Builds 5000 and 5001, with kernel version NT 6.0 support Firefox 38.8.0esr, but build 5048 supports versions lower than 10.0esr. Builds 5098, 5112, 5219 support Firefox 10.0esr, and if you modify the installer they support Firefox 20.0. Builds 5231.2, 5259, 5270, 5284 supported Firefox 20.0 and possibly 21.0a1, but I haven't tested that. Can anyone tell me why Longhorn build 4074 supported the "most up-to-date" version of Firefox? It is almost as good as Firefox 52.9.0esr on Windows Vista. I have tried other browsers on build 4074, and this is what I got:
-Chrome 25 (slow and sometimes buggy, but usable)
-Safari 5 (usable)
-K-Meleon 76 Release Candidate 1 (interface very buggy, even with Klassic theme, but otherwise usable)
-Opera 12.18 (usable)
-Pale Moon 27.x BETA (a little bit slow, but usable)
-RetroZilla 2.2 (usable, but Gecko version a little bit outdated).
I couldn't get Mypal or Arctic Fox or Serpent, because they crashed upon launch. None of the browsers I mentioned earlier, except RetroZilla didn't work on other Longhorn builds (neither pre-reset, nor post-reset). If anyone knows why build 4074 is the only "modern" Longhorn build?
Thank you very much.
Note: I considered "Longhorn" builds all builds that have "Code-Name "Longhorn"" refferences. So all pre-reset builds (even those with Windows XP boot screen and winver.exe) and all post-reset builds with the Windows Code Name Longhorn boot screen (even builds 3790; 5000 and 5001 with Longhorn EULA). :D

Schneider616
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:46 pm
Location: Bacau, Romania

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Schneider616 »

Is this vanilla 4074? I remember there were a few unofficial variations - Reloaded and what I think was called Omega (not Omega-13, mind you, I remember it being something else.), which if I'm not mistaken, do make use of some replaced files from XP - not sure about this (whoever is savvy enough on this subject, feel absolutely free to prove me wrong!) but I recall being able to run newer FF versions - this was with a 4074 Reloaded image, mainly because I wanted to do a build of that era - it was a rather standard Pentium 4 2.8GHz Northwood, Gigabyte 8IPE1000, Radeon 9550 Gecube (I think it was the 256MB flavour) and about a gig or two of RAM.

Haven't tried a vanilla 4074 image, but I'd love to do so whenever I will have some free time to piece my current P4 machine back together (Prescott HT 3GHz, the 478 kind.)
My PCs:
PC - Intel Core i5-3470 3.6GHz,16GB RAM,500W FSP Bluestorm II PSU,2x1TB,Samsung DVD-RW drive,Windows 10 x64,Gigabyte B75M-D3H
Aspire 6930G - Intel Core 2 Duo T9400, 6GB RAM, 90W Acer charger, 1TB HDD+500GB HDD, Sony-Optiarc DVD-RW, Windows 7 x64

dixieLH
User avatar
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2021 8:59 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by dixieLH »

it was Sigma :)

Stef Mihai
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:06 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Stef Mihai »

Schneider616 wrote:
Sat Sep 24, 2022 4:51 pm
Is this vanilla 4074? I remember there were a few unofficial variations - Reloaded and what I think was called Omega (not Omega-13, mind you, I remember it being something else.), which if I'm not mistaken, do make use of some replaced files from XP - not sure about this (whoever is savvy enough on this subject, feel absolutely free to prove me wrong!) but I recall being able to run newer FF versions - this was with a 4074 Reloaded image, mainly because I wanted to do a build of that era - it was a rather standard Pentium 4 2.8GHz Northwood, Gigabyte 8IPE1000, Radeon 9550 Gecube (I think it was the 256MB flavour) and about a gig or two of RAM.

Haven't tried a vanilla 4074 image, but I'd love to do so whenever I will have some free time to piece my current P4 machine back together (Prescott HT 3GHz, the 478 kind.)
No, all builds that I tested were real, downloaded from winworldpc or from archive.org! I tested the real build 4074 and all other builds. I tried to debomb and patch winlogon.exe where possible, but these are the only modifications I used. I also tried to enable Aero. But this didn't influence compatibility with those apps. I don't like modified versions or fake operating systems
Stef Mihai wrote:
Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:40 am
Hello, :beta: Arcive users! I have encountered something very wired in Longhorn builds (both pre-reset and post-reset builds). I tried to install some <relatively> modern web browsers, as well as other types of software. All Longhorn pre-reset builds were able to support Firefox 12.0, but build 4074 jumped to Firefox 45.9.0esr and even 46.0b1! Builds after 4074 returned to Firefox 12.0. The development reset: build 3790 (if updated to SP2) can support Firefox 52.9.0esr, otherwise Firefox 12.0 will be the last. (That is very logical as this build has the number NT 5.2 so it will be recognized as Windows XP). Builds 5000 and 5001, with kernel version NT 6.0 support Firefox 38.8.0esr, but build 5048 supports versions lower than 10.0esr. Builds 5098, 5112, 5219 support Firefox 10.0esr, and if you modify the installer they support Firefox 20.0. Builds 5231.2, 5259, 5270, 5284 supported Firefox 20.0 and possibly 21.0a1, but I haven't tested that. Can anyone tell me why Longhorn build 4074 supported the "most up-to-date" version of Firefox? It is almost as good as Firefox 52.9.0esr on Windows Vista. I have tried other browsers on build 4074, and this is what I got:
-Chrome 25 (slow and sometimes buggy, but usable)
-Safari 5 (usable)
-K-Meleon 76 Release Candidate 1 (interface very buggy, even with Klassic theme, but otherwise usable)
-Opera 12.18 (usable)
-Pale Moon 27.x BETA (a little bit slow, but usable)
-RetroZilla 2.2 (usable, but Gecko version a little bit outdated).
I couldn't get Mypal or Arctic Fox or Serpent, because they crashed upon launch. None of the browsers I mentioned earlier, except RetroZilla didn't work on other Longhorn builds (neither pre-reset, nor post-reset). If anyone knows why build 4074 is the only "modern" Longhorn build?
Thank you very much.
Note: I considered "Longhorn" builds all builds that have "Code-Name "Longhorn"" refferences. So all pre-reset builds (even those with Windows XP boot screen and winver.exe) and all post-reset builds with the Windows Code Name Longhorn boot screen (even builds 3790; 5000 and 5001 with Longhorn EULA). :D
Update: I got Firefox 46.0b1 on build 4074, and 21.0a1 on builds 5270 and 5284.
I am using Firefox 46.0b1 on Longhorn build 4074 right now to see the topic! When I have acess to the image uploader, I will post some screenshots.

Actually, Schneider616, I want to find out why this huge difference exists between builds. If I wanted to try a modded version, I would try out Longhorn Sigma (for pre-reset) and Shorthorn 5219 (for post-reset). These mods seem the nearest to what really existed, but I prefer real Operating Systems.

Andydudes
User avatar
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2021 7:54 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Andydudes »

No, all builds that I tested were real, downloaded from winworldpc or from archive.org! I tested the real build 4074 and all other builds. I tried to debomb and patch winlogon.exe where possible, but these are the only modifications I used. I also tried to enable Aero. But this didn't influence compatibility with those apps. I don't like modified versions or fake operating systems
What assemblies of 4074 are you talking about? I know only two - one is Evolution, the other is only for tests. They are absolutely identical, apparently the second one was only for internal testing, they were released on the same day. Other assemblies are not originall.
Image

Stef Mihai
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:06 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Stef Mihai »

I downloaded the build from archive.org, and it was in Evaluation Mode. I used TweakNT to remove the stupid timebomb and patched winlogon.exe manually. At first the build wasn't modified. I modified it to be an every day operating system, actually. Without timebomb or activation it seems even better than Windows Vista RTM. But I say again, I haven't modified the system's number to recognize itself as Windows Server 2003 or something like that. Every app I installed recognized my system as Windows Vista, build 4074, or more precisely, Windows NT 6.0.4074.idx02.040425-1535.
Last edited by Stef Mihai on Wed Sep 28, 2022 9:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Stef Mihai
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:06 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Stef Mihai »

Update: Firefox 21.0a2 works on build 5270, but it crashed on build 5284.
I have tried Microsoft Office 2003 on Longhorn 4074 and 5270, both of them supported it. I wouldn't try Office 2007, though. I don't think any Longhorn would support it. Maybe the Windows Server Code Name Longhorn, that is the counterpart of Windows Vista supports it. I haven't a Code Name Longhorn Server build till now, but I am considering downloading build 6001.16606. I don't think it's much different from Windows Vista SP1. I may also try the pre-reset build 4066 to see if it is as good as client's build 4074.
I also got Adobe 8.0 on Longhorn 4074.

Stef Mihai
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:06 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Stef Mihai »

I may have also found another client Longhorn build that might be as good as Longhorn 4074: Longhorn build 4067. From what I read, it is mostly similar with build 4074, but it lacks WinFS and is prone to unrecoverable crashes, unlinke 4074. I can't test this build because it worls only on real Itanium machines. (It is an IA-64 only build). If someone in here has or had this build, can this person say how good is this build?
Does it support Firefox 46.0b1, like build 4074?

dixieLH
User avatar
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2021 8:59 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by dixieLH »

do you even read what you write ?
I may have also found another client Longhorn build that might be as good as Longhorn 4074
... ... is prone to unrecoverable crashes, unlinke 4074

Stef Mihai
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:06 pm

Re: Windows(R) Code-Name "Longhorn" build 4074 mystery

Post by Stef Mihai »

dixieLH wrote:
Wed Sep 28, 2022 10:33 pm
do you even read what you write ?
I may have also found another client Longhorn build that might be as good as Longhorn 4074
... ... is prone to unrecoverable crashes, unlinke 4074
I wasn't very careful, sorry. I don't know if thiat information is real or not because I HAVE NOT TESTED IT!!! I do not own an IA-64 machine. I just read about it.

Post Reply