[citation][nom]joytech22[/nom]It was to be expected, Isn't windows 8 taking a "prettier" approach with the floating bubble windows and stuff? (as seen from pics posted here)[/citation]
UI reworks will be towards the latter end of the development cycle. Even if this was the real Milestone 1 (yes, only M1 - check the filename), it would be built to get core OS changes out for testing, not showing off pretty bubbles.
Umm, that's because this is an early build, from September. It was still Windows 6.1... no biggie. It's in the process of being changed, people. Remember the early Longhorn builds? They identified themselves as Windows XP, then Longhorn XP, then Vista.
Ignorence is bliss. People that download crap like this end up getting viruses and then complain that it wasn't real and they got a virus from it. Well then you deserve to get one for being so ignorant when it comes to downlaoding something that has no legit refrence to provide.
I really wish people would do their research before they post "FAKE". This is an early Milestone 1 build from September 2010. This was before re-branding had taken place, which only happens later in the development. This has been confirmed real by several sources. Just because it -looks- like Windows 7, doesn't mean it IS Windows 7. Had you actually got a copy you could look around the OS and find out for yourself it is real by looking at some of the new features.
As James above and others said, this is only a milestone, which means that most of the visual doodads has yet to be implemented. At this stage only core functionality is partially implemented and tested.
Same was with Windows 7 and Vista, they look like the OS:es they were based on before the UI changed in later milestones and early betas. And not every file in the OS get updated as well. Only once the product hits beta most of its core functionality is in place and only bugtesting and final functionality adjustments are done. Milestones are always visually the same as previous OS with only version numbers and perhaps logos changed.
Either way, we will review the m1 thoroughly to determine its validity. We have a lot of dedicated members that would have by now detected if it was a fake. But since the release comes from a trusted source I have no doubt it's authentic.
And seriously, your source of info is from torrent site comments? Half of them always say "fake" since they expect it to either look different, or have all the functions advertised to be in Win8, or simply because it's an early release. Most of the people claiming this don't know how development works, or simply put, they don't know a thing about it.
We at Betaarchive do, since its our business to discuss and learn about betas.
And Betaarchive is not a private FTP site, it's a public beta forum that everyone can join.
[citation][nom]mobrocket[/nom]Just go ubuntu and u will have something new every 6 months unless u love gaming, then u are still stuck with windows... if figure game developers would support linux so that players could spend more money on games and less on windows disk[/citation]
Most people don't upgrade every version, 95 to 2000 or XP to 7 for example, and seeing as there is 10 years between XP and 7 then asking people to pay $100 in 10 years and complaining about the cost is just another way of saying you are a cheapskate.
Or as the old saying goes, if you want the best you have to pay for it.
I found absolutely no evidence that this is a fake in this article? Is the author just writing what he assumes from comments? I've also read in comments that this is Milestone 1 when UI changes come into Milestone 3. There are also Windows 8 sites that have leaked information of future builds that have a slightly higher build number than this.
I'm very disappointed in this amateur post considering this is supposed to be one of the major tech sites. A little homework to be done before posting is to be expected. Pathetic.
[citation][nom]James Barley[/nom]Umm, that's because this is an early build, from September. It was still Windows 6.1... no biggie. It's in the process of being changed, people. Remember the early Longhorn builds? They identified themselves as Windows XP, then Longhorn XP, then Vista.[/citation]
Longhorn, used the NT6 kernel....not the NT5 kernel that Win2k/XP used. New kernel means new development. Longhorn, aka Vista, was not built off of XP at all and in fact uses a different kernel. Windows8, is being built on the NT7 kernel...making Windows8, the actual Windows ver 7.0.
[quotemsg=9283934,18,205099]Longhorn, used the NT6 kernel....not the NT5 kernel that Win2k/XP used. New kernel means new development. Longhorn, aka Vista, was not built off of XP at all and in fact uses a different kernel. Windows8, is being built on the NT7 kernel...making Windows8, the actual Windows ver 7.0.[/quotemsg]
What they use in the RTM is irrelevant, this is early development we are talking about. Do you think Microsoft simply pushes the DEL button on the keyboard and say "hey, let's start from scratch this time. Blank page. Delete everything old!"? No, they start with an early version and work from there. Eventually they change enough core features in the kernel to merit a version change, but until then it's more or less the same as its predecessor.
Longhorn started out with the same kernel as XP yes, so James is right. Remember also the long development process Vista had which resulted in it being scrapped and re-done with Windows Server 2003 as a base. Before LH started its development there was no "new" kernel, just the current ones.
Same thing here with Windows 8. They use Windows 7 as base and go from there. If they change the kernel enough it may very well get a new version number. Or it may not. But at the moment in Milestone 2 (as with the leak this thread is about) it's still based on Windows 7.
You're free to see for yourself, we got plenty of early Longhorn builds for you to dissect if you want. But Microsoft (as most developers) has always based their new products on old products.
Windows 95 initially based on DOS. Windows 98 based on 95. Me based on 98.
They restarted indeed with NT, but that bore fruit from a Microsoft-IBM joint project called NT OS/2, which later became Windows NT. Then it moved on, NT 3.5, 3.51, 4.0, Windows 2000, Windows XP. All based on the previous version. And you will see this everytime you look at an early beta or milestone build.
The Windows 8 build on BetaArchive is indeed a genuine one, even if it looks like Windows 7 with logos changed. But remember, key components these days are signed by Microsoft. If someone cut and paste bits and pieces the signature would be invalid. And there's no way to sign the files yourself since only Microsoft can do that. So if you find a library with symbols saying Windows 8, or resource files with Windows 8 references in them and it's properly signed then you better believe it's genuine .
This is early development builds, they add in new features to the Windows 7 kernel THEN upgrade the kernel later...It was the same with every version of windows, read up on this stuff before you report it.
News stories like this are the reasons I rarely come to Toms for news any-more, they rarely report stuff right.
This is a real Windows 8 build, it has been confirmed by people at http://betaarchive.com, who know what they're talking about.
There's also alot of microsoft employees that are registrated on the site, and talk about beta's, and all of them say it's legit
Who do you believe? A site that talks about hardware or a site dedicated to the collection of Windows betas?
Also, I don't mean this site is bad, I just mean that there should be some research made before posting stuff. I my self have tried this build, and I just can't explain how for example, the .iso mounting drivers are signed, and how there's traces of the Aero Lite theme inside the Windows folder.
I have this version of windows (6.1.7850.0.winmain_win8m1.100922-1508_x86fre_client-enterprise_en-us) installed on my Dell Studio and it is pretty legit... there haven't been many major improvements. the aero doesn't work quite right yet, the addition of the user tile is cool, and an "up one folder" button has been added to the explorer but other than that just a tweaked windows 7 ;p
I have read several different forums all saying that this is NOT a FAKE
I am running it as a primary Os on a test machine and it is using Win 7 Enterprise as the base for the Os
I did find it was very buggy until it was activated ...now it runs almost flawless
There are a few Hidden extras ....you need Win 8 tweaker to reveal these