Vista Service Pack 1 Spotted In The Wild

With all the Microsoft-created confusion out there around when — and even whether — the company plans to deliver the first service pack (SP) for Windows Vista, it's nice to see some concrete proof that Vista SP1 does exist.

The WinFuture.de folks managed to grab a quick snapshot of a machine running a build of Vista SP1 during one of the Rally talks at the Windows Hardware Engineering Conference (WinHEC) in Los Angeles this week. Plain as day, it says: "Windows Build 6001 Service Pack 1, v113.")

Screenshot: >> Click here <<
View: All About Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Apple iPhone receives FCC approval

Next Story

Vista's ReadyBoost flash drives lack significant boost

36 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I'm sorry to revive an ancient thread of one week ago, but i would like to comment about some posts...

PureLegend said,
6 months after Vista RTM and they're on Build 6001?

Why do I doubt that?

waruikoohii said,
It's not a Vista build.

How do I know?

The build number is 6001. Microsoft doesn't increment the build number for service packs.

When Microsoft was making Service Pack 1 for Windows Server 2003, they were also making a new version of Windows (The x64 version). Windows Server 2003 is build 3790 but while the new Windows was being made, I read that beta versions were build 3791. Which is a logical way to differentiate a stable build 3790 vs a beta build 3791. Just consider that 1 like a flag indicating a dll should not be used on a production environment. When Service Pack 1 was released, the build changed back to 3790. Being the update from version 5.2.3790.0 to 5.2.3790.1830.

Neobond said,
Windows XP was 5.1.2600 but it ended up being 5.1.2800 if I recall correctly

You are recalling incorrectly.
XPSP0 = 5.1.2600.0
XPSP1 = 5.1.2600.1106
XPSP2 = 5.1.2600.2180

6.0.2600, 6.0.2800 and 6.0.2900 are Internet Explorer builds.

Its great to see microsoft applying the improvements from Server 2008 to Vista so soon. Although it seems to me almost as if the RTM release of Vista was no more than a beta for the more stable SP1 version!

First off those screen shots prove nothing. And yes Longhorn is version 6001. Vista is build 6000. Since RTM, XP has always been build 2600.

Not that Microsoft internals and some TAP partners aren't running newer builds. ;)

And just because Vista is build 6000, does not mean it was built 6000 times. Far less!

They skip build numbers all the time people! Some times hundreds and even thousands.

war said,
First off those screen shots prove nothing. And yes Longhorn is version 6001. Vista is build 6000. Since RTM, XP has always been build 2600.

Not that Microsoft internals and some TAP partners aren't running newer builds. ;)

And just because Vista is build 6000, does not mean it was built 6000 times. Far less!

They skip build numbers all the time people! Some times hundreds and even thousands.


Or maybe not. Maybe built/complilation was missing a "a" on a line in build 5999 and they had to fix it and rebuild it a 6000. Of course they could consider a "build" a whole nother thing. We will never know unless we work as a Windows programmer...:(

Hmm, with the new image based install, I wonder how slipsteaming will happen/work?

And will custom disks (such as nlite created XP disks) be a thing of the past ? that would suck.

Problems with such things could explain why I've yet to see any system builders offering Vista Recovery disks, they were still only options for XP systems.

waruikoohii said,
It's not a Vista build.

How do I know?

The build number is 6001. Microsoft doesn't increment the build number for service packs.


AFAIK, they're including the newest updated Kernel, the one shipping with Windows Server 2008. The small leap in the build number makes sense to me.

PharosBR said,

AFAIK, they're including the newest updated Kernel, the one shipping with Windows Server 2008. The small leap in the build number makes sense to me.

That's exactly it.

I dunno maybe they decided to not change back to the old version number methodology, makes sense to me.

edit: uhg that was for purelegend..

More than 1 build per build version increment. Do you really think retail windows version 6.0 is actual build #6000?

Yeah, but during Longhorn development, build numbers moved much faster.

365*5=1825
6000-2600=3400
3400/1825=1.86

So yeah, I expected faster. Unless they have a Vienna branch, which is moving much faster.

You do know that after the RTM release of Windows that they do not increment the core build numbers any further, right?

Look at Windows XP for example, the RTM gold was build 2600, and after applying SP2, it still shows build 2600. Infact the version string for XP with SP2 is Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.061219-0316 : Service Pack 2.

You can see that the v.113 is the build number of the Service Pack for Vista.

Look at Windows XP for example, the RTM gold was build 2600, and after applying SP2, it still shows build 2600. Infact the version string for XP with SP2 is Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.061219-0316 : Service Pack 2.

You are not up to date. XP SP2 is now 2600.xpsp_sp2_qfe.070227-2300

M118LR said,
Look at Windows XP for example, the RTM gold was build 2600, and after applying SP2, it still shows build 2600. Infact the version string for XP with SP2 is Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.061219-0316 : Service Pack 2.

You are not up to date. XP SP2 is now 2600.xpsp_sp2_qfe.070227-2300

ahh no you are not uptodate the current sp / qfe version is
5.1.2600.3100 (xpsp_sp2_qfe.070309-0024)

Primetime2006 said,

Supposed to be released in first half of 2008.

Yes, SUPPOSED to be.

There's been a lot of word around saying that it ain't coming.

I really don't think they'd cut XP off so soon, so I'm hoping these are just rumors. That's why I'm eager for such news.

Some voiced say it was a misunderstanding and that screenshot actually shows the actual Windows Server 2008 beta build. It seems that it has exactly that version number. Of course we won't know for sure if no one asks Microsoft... :nuts:

Islander said,
Some voiced say it was a misunderstanding and that screenshot actually shows the actual Windows Server 2008 beta build. It seems that it has exactly that version number. Of course we won't know for sure if no one asks Microsoft... :nuts:


well it is nice to see it being made @ microsoft tho already rather then later

Islander said,
Some voiced say it was a misunderstanding and that screenshot actually shows the actual Windows Server 2008 beta build. It seems that it has exactly that version number. Of course we won't know for sure if no one asks Microsoft... :nuts:

yeah Beta 3 of 'Longhorn/2008' is Build 6001, SP1, V.126

J_R_G said,
Vista SP1 kernel and longhorn kernel are the same, is what I read, that might explain it.

You're right, all the kernel and other core changes MS makes/fixes in the longhorn server version will then be shipped in SP1 for vista, this has always been the plan as long as I can remember.

If anyone is out there running Server 2008 Beta 3, it's a good sign of how Vista with SP1 will be. Well, minus all the server stuff that is. :P

Islander said,
Some voiced say it was a misunderstanding and that screenshot actually shows the actual Windows Server 2008 beta build. It seems that it has exactly that version number. Of course we won't know for sure if no one asks Microsoft... :nuts:

The screenshot itself tells you thats not Server 2008. For one, Server 2008 doesn't have Vista Wallpapers included with it.

lol i would like to say "interesting" but until we know wot SP1 will actually include this doesn't interest me at all.

Im sure others will like the news though