Shh... let's not leak our hard work.
A leaked build of Windows 8 has hit the internet. The beta forum BetaArchive has one of the first records of the release, which was uploaded by an anonymous user (of course).
The file name for the 2.45 GB image is 6.1.7850.0.winmain_win8m1.100922-1508_x86fre_client-enterprise_en-us.iso.But it's a fake. (see update below)
Slyck read the feedback from torrent sites and found comments saying that this is just Windows 7 renamed to Windows 8: "This is a fake. Info gathered from files : 6.1.7600. 16385(win7_rtm.090713-1255). Since Win 8 is a new kernel, this aint it."
UPDATE: Slyck may be incorrect. This could really just be an old, but genuine build of Windows 8.
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.
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.
/mrpijey, co-admin of Betaarchive.
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
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'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.
It's Real!
Reading your articles is a total waste of time.
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.
http://www.windows8update.com/2011/04/14/new-windows-8-video-build-7955/
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
News stories like this are the reasons I rarely come to Toms for news any-more, they rarely report stuff right.