Neowin.net

5700 is the RTM branch tho, but yea you could be right.

- it keeps us happy

It's called constructive criticism. Speculations on build numbers are great, but in the end of the day, it's everything but build numbers that counts. In any case... since we seem to be breaking some kind of a rule here, feel free to delete this ;-)

You must of missed this part of the post.



We posted that as news over a week ago and he was wrong, so imo a worthy mention and it appears he has more 'inside information' on what's coming.

I also can't remember when Neowin started shying away from build info news, thats after all what made us what we are today with Windows XP betas.

As you said, a week ago he was wrong. Should we have a newspost everytime he thinks he has guessed the build number for the next milestone?

Indeed, neowin, as a tech-oriented forum, always liked build numbers. After about 5 years of Vista being in development and about 2000 build later (I remember Longhorn was at 3xxx, then 4xxx, now 5xx we have understood that builds are not by a long shot any kind of measure. Sure it's fun to fool around with numbers, but after 2000 builds, a couple of project restarts and the like, I have had my fair share of build numbers. Now all I want is to see it done.

It would be at least nice to have a what's expected for RC1. But a build number bump alone won't do for news for me... not for Vista anymore.

I hope it doesn't sound like trolling, since I'm really not in a mood for that. I see this as constructive criticism, not bashing of any kind.

Last edited by nw_raptor on 31 Aug 2006 - 09:15

Paul Thurrotts opinions or news items get posted a lot because too many people who post the news on this forum, and other forums, rely too much on everything Paul Thurrott says. I've never said that he doesn't really have sources inside Microsoft, what I've been trying to make clear is how much he's been wrong about things here lately and in the past.

What I'd like to see is any news he puts on his site concerning release dates and what version these builds will be (betas or release candidates) stay on his site and shouldn't circulate soo fast. Because most of the time he's just wrong. Then people start to get upset because they thought RC1 of Vista came out this certain day that he gave and nothing gets released and everyone gets upset. That's what bugs me. Too many people rely on what he says when he's proven pretty well that he's not a reliable source of release dates and what those builds will be.

That's why I just ignore anything the guy says involving release dates. I don't actually care much for anything he has to say. I've never really read any reviews he's done that looked well written or anything. In a lot of his reviews he does nothing but bash Microsoft about this and that, while at the same time he makes sure to kiss their butt during the same review. He's one of the most two-faced people I've ever seen.

This, of course, is all just my opinion. I just hate seeing how many people rely on him for release date news. It's not just him it's others too, but for some reason everyone has to report what he says first. Even when news came from other sources besides him, when it gets reported on other sites, some of those sites make it appear that he was the original source when it wasn't actually him. But he's always quick to update his little dateline on his site to make it look like he knew before anyone else when in reality he didn't.

Last edited by NightmarE D on 31 Aug 2006 - 09:44

1. Release dates and software plans change frequently. He just posts what he knows to be the most recent plan. If other people take that to mean *it will happen* then more fool them.

2. You're complaining that he reviews stuff properly? Isn't it more balanced to have both the pro and the cons in a review?

Isn't that the fault of the reader, for thinking everything they read is gospel, not the fault of neowin or Paul?
No, that shouldn't have been a question. That IS the fault of the reader.