Newer version number for Windows 8.1 Update 1 revealed on Microsoft support page

A few days ago we reported that the leaked version of Windows 8.1 Update 1 that many people downloaded a few weeks might not be the RTM build as previously thought. Now a new version number for the update may have been discovered in, of all places, a Microsoft support web page.

Neowin member "FaiKee" spotted the support page and alerted us on our message board to his discovery earlier this morning. The page describes a hotfix that Microsoft has released for "Video preview is blurry when you open a camera application in Windows 8.1 or Windows Server 2012 R2"

​When scrolling down the page, a number of selections can be expanded to show which specific versions of Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2 are supported by this hotfix. As "FaiKee" discovered, and highlighted, when he looked into the "Additional files for all supported x64-based versions of Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2" selection, the following file number is listed.

The key part of the file number is "6.3.9600.17042" The version number for the Update 1 build that leaked on the Internet a few weeks ago was 17031; Microsoft is already offering a hotfix for the build even though it has yet to be released to the public.

So is 17042 the final RTM build version or are there more in the works? We likely won't know for certain until Microsoft officially releases Windows 8.1 Update 1, which is expected to happen in early April.

Thanks, again, to FaiKee for the tip!

Source: Microsoft | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Images of Amazon branded game controller leaked

Next Story

Microsoft and Nokia deal to go through defying Indian legal battle

37 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Looks like one of the updates (KB2919442) came out a few days ago. For those who didnt install the leaked versions. And it appears to be identical to the leaked version. Same date, and same size.

Read Chris123NT's post above. Also try reading over at MDL - and you will see that the publication of this hotfix indeed does confirm that the KBs leaked and made available previously are those of the RTM build of Update 1. I believe the hotfix referenced in this article REQUIRES that you have KB2919355 installed (the primary KB for Update 1). I don't understand all of the specifics of it, but people much smarter than me over at MDL have confirmed that the very publication of the mentioned hotfix only proves that the leaked 17031 is, in fact, the RTM build of Update 1.

Sorry but I trust WZOR and he released what he said was RTM. If it wasn't then he would've said something by now. As Chris says this could just be an internal build number after the RTM.

Holy crap. This is just the version of a hotfix that will be applied over the main update 1 package when it arrives, this is not a complete overhaul of update 1. Stop reading into every little increment of a number to prove some whacked chinese guy's theory.

17031 = RTM /end

Anything with a newer number is a hotfix that will patch ON TOP OF update 1.

Please don't tell me I will have to reformat and reinstall Windows if it turns out that this is the correct RTM and the one I installed from a week ago isn't

Well you may have to wait to find out, this is why one should not install leaked builds on anything but test machines or VM's. I'm glad I didn't install this myself, I almost did.

I don't know if it is boredom, but it seems there is a desire to run stories that "burst the bubble" of the early adopters of Update 1. Lol, buzzkillers....

I want to let you know, Microsoft keeps updating libs and making new builds even after RTM. I supposed in this case if the build of that update 1 is actually what we're focusing on, and RTM isn't out yet, we can assume there's still working being done on it.

If the build number refers to some package inside Update 1, revised builds will always be available. I often find obscure updates and updated builds in various packages released to address specific issues for example, which could also be what this is (so it's newer than update 1 but part of a separate fix for a specific issue).

Devmer11 said,
just run system restore to a point before you updated easy fix I did it an hour ago

Small tangent but who the hell actually leaves that feature on? I've been turning it off upon fresh installs since its introduction back in WinME.

Haha it's a life saver if you screwed something up XD like updating to a leaked update and finding out it's not final it's helped me more times then not

Devmer11 said,
Haha it's a life saver if you screwed something up XD like updating to a leaked update and finding out it's not final it's helped me more times then not

Never since its introduction have I seen System Restore being able to fix anything.

Well, once. A relative brought me a Vista machine that was stuck in a loop installing an update.

Still--personally, I use VMs extensively nowadays, and snapshots just work better...on top of that, unless one of my VMs is simply disposable, the whole disk file is already being backed up on a regular basis...whereas I'm just never sure what System Restore may or may not leave behind.

Nogib said,

Small tangent but who the hell actually leaves that feature on? I've been turning it off upon fresh installs since its introduction back in WinME.


I keep it on everywhere because it's super useful if Windows one day just won't start or has some serious problem. It's hell to figure these things out on your own, when it might have been a messed up update or install.

To the contrary of some here, System Restore usually fixes obscure problems for me and I find it ridiculous to attempt to save space for something that consume like 1-2% of drive space when a 1 TB drive costs like $60. I fail to see how this discussion even takes place, to be honest. It's almost on the level of using drive-wide NTFS compression to save space.

Nogib said,

Small tangent but who the hell actually leaves that feature on? I've been turning it off upon fresh installs since its introduction back in WinME.

Why would you disable something that doesn't affect performance and saves grief?

Eric said,

Why would you disable something that doesn't affect performance and saves grief?

These people are still living in the XP and earlier days where making little tweaks and turning off services could actually improve computer speed. CPUs are too powerful nowadays to bother tuning things off that use a minute portion of them.

_dandy_ said,

Never since its introduction have I seen System Restore being able to fix anything.

I've saved countless systems thanks to system restore of clients, that otherwise would have required a lot more time and effort and lost data. Some varieties of ucash could also be repaired with system restore before they started crashing the restore points.

ha ha ha. maybe all those updaters who wouldn't wait are going to have "walshed" windows. see? don't mess with updates. Take it from an owner of a "walshed" phone.

It's all good I just used my couch computer, which I have an image for anyway as far as 8.1, worst comes to worst, i'll restore the image install update 1 and a few other app updates and be good as new!

warwagon said,
It's all good I just used my couch computer, which I have an image for anyway as far as 8.1, worst comes to worst, i'll restore the image install update 1 and a few other app updates and be good as new!

I do the same, but a step even further. If anyone has no 'extra' computer to test these out on, just do this: Make a separate partition just for 'Backup' files, put all your data like docs and pics into this backup partition. Then it makes it very easy to just reinstall windows if it bunks up, no need to worry about it crashing and losing all your data. Easy test system now.

warwagon said,
It's all good I just used my couch computer, which I have an image for anyway as far as 8.1

I didn't pick you for a W8 user...

This is rather misleading article title... the KB article in no way references Windows 8 Update 1. This is simply a patch/hotfix for Windows that has a newer build number than that which is of the released components for Update 1. Nothing more, nothing less. That is not to say that I know that the components that where issued are final RTM code, but likewise this article is misleading.

Actually, if they want this to start shipping on any boxes in April, they should have gone RTM by now. It takes a while to get the bits to OEMs and have them validate on their hardware, with their drivers and whatever other software they install.

JustAnotherTechie said,
Yeh! I mean, it's not like they usually RTM Windows in Summer and don't release until October or anything... </sarc>

but there is a massive difference between a full new os and a service pack, hell OEMs don't even have to include it right away it could just come via WU as usual

pmbAustin said,
Actually, if they want this to start shipping on any boxes in April, they should have gone RTM by now. It takes a while to get the bits to OEMs and have them validate on their hardware, with their drivers and whatever other software they install.

Indeed, my guess is that these higher numbers refer to updates that will be installed during while people setup new boxes.

pmbAustin said,
Actually, if they want this to start shipping on any boxes in April, they should have gone RTM by now. It takes a while to get the bits to OEMs and have them validate on their hardware, with their drivers and whatever other software they install.

This isn't a new Windows version, it's a minor update. It doesn't need to be pre-installed.

When MS ships Service Packs for Windows, they always give OEMs updated Service Packs to pre-install.

This "update" may be "minor" compared to a full new version, but it also takes a LONG time to install/update, because it updates a LOT... even if most of it is under the covers.

Cosmocronos said,

Indeed, my guess is that these higher numbers refer to updates that will be installed during while people setup new boxes.

Agreed. Higher number build may also refer to the Patch Tuesday updates as well.

Cosmocronos said,

Indeed, my guess is that these higher numbers refer to updates that will be installed during while people setup new boxes.

Agreed. Higher number builds may also be the regular Patch Tuesday updates.