microsoft
Report a problem

Windows 7 Build 7048 leaks

Tom Warren   on 03 March 2009 - 20:13 · 57 comments & 21424 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Yesterday we covered the 7048 screenshot leak but word reaches us that an x64 version of 7048 has leaked to popular torrent sites today.

7048 carries the build tag 7048.0.winmain.090219-1845 meaning it was compiled on the 19th February. According to the screenshots that leaked yesterday 7048 includes a tweaked start button, new icons for Notes, Paint and Calculator applications and Aero Peek is enabled on alt+tab.

7048 is a pre-RC1 compile of Windows 7 and is not likely to become the final RC1 build.


Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 57 additional comments
#1 Disengage on 03 Mar 2009 - 20:16
Tried to get this but it was taking forever so i'll wait for the public RC .
(4 replies) #2 +NeoFlux on 03 Mar 2009 - 20:17
I'd be lying if I said I wasn't downloading it right now...
#2.1 andrewbares on 03 Mar 2009 - 21:27
I'm just gonna wait for the RC build. Upgrading is always a hassle, and I don't wanna loose my data.
#2.2 morF (r) on 04 Mar 2009 - 03:59
It's actually a 20-minute process. Although the 7048 can only be installed through a bootable usb and cannot upgrade, only be set up as a new install
#2.3 blackroseMD1 on 04 Mar 2009 - 05:38
morF ® said,
It's actually a 20-minute process. Although the 7048 can only be installed through a bootable usb and cannot upgrade, only be set up as a new install


I used it to upgrade from 7022 just by putting the files on another hard drive and clicking setup.exe
#2.4 PeterTHX on 06 Mar 2009 - 06:48
andrewbares said,
I'm just gonna wait for the RC build. Upgrading is always a hassle, and I don't wanna loose my data.


Data is neither loose nor tight.

http://loseloose.com/
(2 replies) #3 +King Mustard on 03 Mar 2009 - 20:20
I'm tempted to grab it, but we're that close to the RTM build, I may as well wait.
#3.1 cybertimber2008 on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:29
Skipping the RC?
#3.2 +TCLN Ryster on 03 Mar 2009 - 23:46
The RC is due in April (according to the rumours) and RTM will be at least a month or two after that. You're going to wait for that long?
(4 replies) #4 djlegion on 03 Mar 2009 - 20:46
Will the RC be public?
#4.1 dagamer34 on 03 Mar 2009 - 21:00
Probably. It's the only proper way to test an RC I think.
#4.2 dbam987 on 03 Mar 2009 - 21:01
djlegion said,
Will the RC be public?


I believe it will be made public about a week or two after the MSDN and TechNet people get their hands on it. I think I read somewhere that it will be available in April sometime.
#4.3 morF (r) on 04 Mar 2009 - 04:01
It's definately public. RC --> Release to Candidates. Candidates are us. Long live the bay
#4.4 roadwarrior on 04 Mar 2009 - 06:08
morF ® said,
It's definately public. RC --> Release to Candidates. Candidates are us. Long live the bay


RC does not mean "Release to Candidates", it means "Release Candidate", in other words, the build is a possible candidate for release. Usually only last minute bug fixes occur between RC and RTM.
#5 funkymunky on 03 Mar 2009 - 21:06
Woooo
#6 luis mazza on 03 Mar 2009 - 21:48
Nah... I am only satisfied with literally light speed OS performance in every aspect. Everything else makes me bored... :0 :p
(1 reply) #7 TajByte on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:09
Is build 7048 RC Build or beta build?
#7.1 Kevin. on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:14
It's a pre-RC build
(4 replies) #8 +Steeley on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:14
It's a shame it's 64 and not 32.
#8.1 Thunderbuck on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:22
"It's a shame..." ...why, exactly?
#8.2 +Steeley on 03 Mar 2009 - 23:02
Because I'm running the 32 beta and it would have been good to move to this build and just upgrade over the top of the existing 7000 build.
#8.3 morF (r) on 04 Mar 2009 - 04:02
You can't upgrade with the leaked version! And x64 is definitely the architecture all new OS should be built.
(1 reply) #9 +macf13nd on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:22
how's the game support at this point, for example?
#9.1 +TCLN Ryster on 03 Mar 2009 - 23:47
Games support is not an issue. If it worked on Vista, it'll work on 7, however there are always exceptions to the rule so I stand by to be corrected
(5 replies) #10 FoxieFoxie on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:27
Someone is actually using x86 builds??????
#10.1 FrozenEclipse on 03 Mar 2009 - 22:37
FoxieFoxie said,
Someone is actually using x86 builds??????


Not everybody has 4 GB of RAM or more.
#10.2 iamwhoiam on 03 Mar 2009 - 23:23
Maybe not, but you don't NEED 4GB+ to use 64bit. They really need to push 64bit and quit making 32bit only releases.
#10.3 xendrome on 03 Mar 2009 - 23:28
I didn't realize you were required to have 4GB of ram to run it... or that that was the ONLY benefit... humph.
#10.4 Jugalator on 04 Mar 2009 - 01:41
It's a main benefit though, as running 32-bit software (most apps, pretty much all games) will not improve much.
#10.5 roadwarrior on 04 Mar 2009 - 06:10
iamwhoiam said,
Maybe not, but you don't NEED 4GB+ to use 64bit. They really need to push 64bit and quit making 32bit only releases.


And what exactly are those of us running Windows 7 on netbooks supposed to use?
#11 liemfukliang on 03 Mar 2009 - 23:29
85% Downloading now.
#12 adikoni on 04 Mar 2009 - 00:31
Wtf 4 gig of ram? - got 2 gig on amd dual 64 and win7 64 zips
(6 replies) #13 Baked on 04 Mar 2009 - 00:38
7054 is already leaked...this is old!

And yes MS should stop making 32bit all together, If people want to run old hardware...they should have to stick to old OSes too.

Besides the x64 builds are more stable and get far less malware n viruses!
#13.1 morF (r) on 04 Mar 2009 - 04:03
7054 is not leaked. Rumors appeared to be faked. Unless you want to brighten us with a link (:
#13.2 CalumJR on 04 Mar 2009 - 05:22
morF ® said,
7054 is not leaked. Rumors appeared to be faked. Unless you want to brighten us with a link (:


If you are asking for a torrent link, please don't - it is against our rules.

However, if you are asking for a link to an article about it being leaked... I would allow that

Regardless, the rumor of build 7054 being leaked has been confirmed as fake anyway
#13.3 roadwarrior on 04 Mar 2009 - 06:13
Baked said,
And yes MS should stop making 32bit all together, If people want to run old hardware...they should have to stick to old OSes too.

Wow, another clueless twit who thinks that all 32-bit systems are necessarily old systems. Here's a clue: most (possibly all) netbooks currently being sold use Intel Atom processors, which are 32-bit.
#13.4 Baked on 04 Mar 2009 - 07:53
roadwarrior said,
Wow, another clueless twit who thinks that all 32-bit systems are necessarily old systems. Here's a clue: most (possibly all) netbooks currently being sold use Intel Atom processors, which are 32-bit.


And netbooks make up what 1% of hardware sales if that!


#13.5 roadwarrior on 04 Mar 2009 - 15:59
Baked said,
And netbooks make up what 1% of hardware sales if that!


Considering that netbook class machines have only been generally available for less than a year, and sales only really started to take off around december of last year (3 months ago), even 1% would be impressive, but I'd be willing to bet that netbooks make up much more than 1% of current hardware sales (and the percentage is still rising).
#13.6 spinning_quirK on 04 Mar 2009 - 16:19
I'm glad Microsoft does not hire people like Baked. I do not get the mentality of some people... I either see lazy OEMs who refuse to release 64-bit drivers for their systems, or rabid fanbois who do not seem to get it that 32-bit processors like Core Duo (Yonah) are actually NEWER than Prescotts and 64-bit processors like Athlon64s. It's always one extreme or the other.

(For those who need a grammar lesson, " it's " is a contraction for "it is". Just read the full thing out loud whenever you cannot decide whether to use an apostrophe, or not.)

Athlon64s. Oh man, Microsoft should start releasing 128-bit-only builds, and people with old processors like A64s should stick to older OSes!

Last edited by spinning_quirK on 04 Mar 2009 - 16:30
#14 92GTA on 04 Mar 2009 - 00:52
I can't find a 7054 anywhere?

Can anyone verify this so I don't waster time downloading 7048?
#15 Wolken007 on 04 Mar 2009 - 00:58
If you are talking about the screenshots that surfaced of the setup files labeled 7054, that is completely fake. The digital signatures are not validated. The shots are just modified files from a previous build, 7022 I believe.
#16 DustRider on 04 Mar 2009 - 01:44
Everyone seeeed like crazyyy!! So glad this leaked! Woooo!

Last edited by DustRider on 04 Mar 2009 - 01:49
#17 DigitalE on 04 Mar 2009 - 03:00
Do beta keys work?
#18 yojamesle on 04 Mar 2009 - 03:25
yes the keys do work, and build 7054 is absolutely fake. some moron was trying to prove himself and ended up making a fool out of himself http://www.hhqc.com/membre/profil.php?membre=Soldatbigviv <<< that is him
#19 .hasan on 04 Mar 2009 - 04:17
does this build let you update from beta 1 or are you required to do a fresh install?
#20 paesan on 04 Mar 2009 - 04:31
Yes you can update from a previous beta and the beta keys do work. I just finished doing an upgrade and everything works fine.
#21 Beastage on 04 Mar 2009 - 11:58
Well this is a fantastic update, I did upgrade and I can notice the benefits, much smoother and much snappier... even tho win7 beta 7000 was already awesome.

This is really the best OS by far in my opinion.
#22 Steven77 on 04 Mar 2009 - 14:13
Congratulation to you 64 bit users who finally got your hands on new builds first before 32 bit users unlike the past couple times. Doesn't make me any less sad about no 32 bit though.
(2 replies) #23 Beast1979 on 04 Mar 2009 - 14:42
Does anyone know if the x64 build has drivers for Creative X-FI cards? I know that beta 1 did not include those drivers and the ones from Creative did not install.

Thanks!
#23.1 corrosive23 on 04 Mar 2009 - 15:16
Yeah they do. Im running an xfi under Windows 7 beta 1 x64.
#23.2 starless.bible.black on 04 Mar 2009 - 21:51
you need to install them in compatibility mode. However, you only get 2.1 - no 5.1 yet....Hopefully (crossing my fingers) learned from their mistakes with driver development for Vista.
(1 reply) #24 LaXu on 04 Mar 2009 - 17:30
Tried upgrading 7000 to 7048. I have 7000 on a 25 GB partition so 7048 wouldn't install because there's not ~10 GB free space. This is just stupid because it'd overwrite files anyway. Basically you need about a 32 GB partition if you want to upgrade Win7 to a newer version. You also can't upgrade by booting from the CD, even though the upgrade option is available. Clicking it just gives a dialog box telling you to boot into Windows and run the installer from the DVD again, again for no valid reason. Hopefully this is fixed in the final because it's totally user unfriendly.

It didn't take long to notice a glaring bug in 7048 after installing it on another hard drive. On the Windows Explorer views (file browser, control panel etc) the path and search field sizes can't be changed. This would be ok otherwise but the path field is way too small to be of any use. 7000 also has these issues but only in the Open dialogs from other programs (and even then you can resize the fields, the setting just doesn't stick).

I also spotted a bug where the UAC confirmation prompt jumped into the top left corner. Not a big issue but annoying enough on a 30" screen.

Minor bugs but if I spotted these minutes after installing, I can expect a lot more in there. I'm sticking with 7000 and waiting for the public RC build.

PS. No X-Fi drivers on 7048. The Creative ones install just fine if you run the installer in Vista compatibility mode. Otherwise drivers installed nicely, unlike 7000 I didn't have to install network or motherboard drivers separately. Windows update also installed drivers for my keyboard and display.
#24.1 starless.bible.black on 04 Mar 2009 - 21:46
no problem upgrading 7000 to 7048 on a 20Gb partition. the installer did recommend more space but installed anyway after I dismissed that message. creative x-fi drivers install but all you get is 2.1 - no 5.1 yet. Knowing how creative screwed their customers with vista drivers I am not putting my hopes up too high.
#25 Vakerorokero on 05 Mar 2009 - 03:18
anyone tried dual booting Vista 64 and This one? would it be better to do separete HDs rather than partitions?
#26 Pegus on 05 Mar 2009 - 08:52
Pardon my ignorance, but are there compatibility modes for 32-bit programs/drivers when running 64-bit windows?
#27 jznomoney on 05 Mar 2009 - 20:03
This build has a nasty bug with adobe flash 10 and ivillage.com. It crashes all the time in IE8.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)