Windows 7 post RTM build 7700 spotted

Screenshots of a Windows 7 post RTM build have shown up on the web this week fueling speculation that Microsoft is compiling early Windows 8 builds.

Russian site, Wzor, leaked a series of screenshots from build 7700.winmain.100122-1900. Although nothing appears to have changed visually, the jump from 7600 (Windows 7 RTM build) to 7700 may suggest some kind of early milestone towards the Windows 8 alpha and beta stage. Microsoft has slowly been compiling post RTM builds of Windows 7 since its July RTM in 2009.

Wzor also published a list of builds that have been compiled after the final Windows 7 RTM. Judging by the list, the software giant has been hard at work compiling builds throughout September 2009 to January 2010:

  • 7650.0.winmain.090917-1843
  • 7651.0.winmain.090924-1802
  • 7656.0.winmain.091015-0833
  • 7658.0.winmain.091019-1850
  • 7659.0.winmain.091020-1830
  • 7660.0.winmain.091021-1736
  • 7661.0.winmain.091022-1755
  • 7662.0.winmain.091023-1645
  • 7664.0.winmain.091027-1825
  • 7691.0.winmain.100106-1825
  • 7692.0.winmain.100107-1735
  • 7693.0.winmain.100111-1820
  • 7694.0.winmain.100113-1753
  • 7695.0.winmain.100114-1855
  • 7696.0.winmain.100115-1725

It does not appear that these builds are service pack builds for Windows 7 SP1 as Wzor has confirmed those began from 7601.winmain_sp. Last week an ex-Microsoft worker penned July 2011 as the RTM date for Windows 8.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 7 on the new Apple iPad will be possible

Next Story

Stable version of Firefox for Mobile released

89 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Likelly, aero will be replaced with a corporate win95-like theme, the msstyle format likelly dropped or made wierder than now. The themeing system (if it isn't dropped) will be made impossible to patch for custom themes. All the bling and non-proffessional, non-productive visual effects will be dropped and only the most basic compositing will be available. The wallpaper feature will be removed and the background replaced with a hardcoded dull color. The system will be ALL function, NO visuals.

EddieZ said,
I think the tempo is too high. 2012 would be the logical year to launch W8.

12/21/2012 to be precise... LOL

Edited by DaveGreen, Feb 2 2010, 6:31pm :

Where's the news? The kernel team didn't get laid off when 7 RTMed last July, so of course there's newer kernel build numbers. That's been the case since NT.

Of course, those build number are totally meaningless to those outside of Microsoft.

And to those questioning service packs--Windows service packs have *never* increased build numbers. XP SP3 is still 2600, same as the first RTM version.

_dandy_ said,
Where's the news? The kernel team didn't get laid off when 7 RTMed last July, so of course there's newer kernel build numbers. That's been the case since NT.

So they are working towards windows 8, so it's news.

_dandy_ said,
And to those questioning service packs--Windows service packs have *never* increased build numbers. XP SP3 is still 2600, same as the first RTM version.

If you actually used something newer than that 8 year old OS, then you would know that they *did* increase the build number with Vista... twice.

bb10 said,

So they are working towards windows 8, so it's news.

News to some, maybe, but business as usual to those who understand the software development process. Some Microsoft devs have been working on Windows 8 since the 7 code was frozen for RTM. Development isn't a seasonal job, you know. These people are employed fulltime.

And if you have to ask--only a very small subset of those who worked on Windows 7 are involved in the subsequent service packs. The rest of the team has moved on.

bb10 said,

If you actually used something newer than that 8 year old OS, then you would know that they *did* increase the build number with Vista... twice.

I'll grant you this much, I haven't been suckered into the whole Vista fiasco, so Vista service packs have been a non-event for me and I haven't paid attention to them at all--so yeah, that's a break from the past. However I'm now on 7, which doesn't yet have a service pack. If it does change the kernel version, wanna bet it'll be called 7601, and not anything > 7700?

I like this version it has some improvements. for example now I can install magic mouse from apple native.
tested and working.

Tpiom said,
It better be a Service Package or I could skip Win7 and wait for Win8.

you are going to from now till around 2011 then.

and chance is it would be released in 2012.

Tpiom said,
It better be a Service Package or I could skip Win7 and wait for Win8.
Why not wait for Win9? or Win10? Hell, why ever bother to upgrade?

In all honesty, i can't see what Windows 8 will be able to bring to the table just yet.

What i think would be smart is if they included features tailored for communication junkies who love communicating in new, diverse ways such as Twitter and Facebook.

In windows 8, I want to see some features that bring the service to you. Something like if I wanna mess around on facebook... deal with photos, comments, apps... etc.. (everything on facebook):

I'd like it all to be built right in on my desktop, maybe some gadgets etc, or instead of a Windows Wallpaper it would be an interface where I can drag and drop from my folder directly to the desktop and organize my goodies from there. It sounds very fun and I'd be like.. stuck on it all day just doing this and that.

Izlude said,
In windows 8, I want to see some features that bring the service to you. Something like if I wanna mess around on facebook... deal with photos, comments, apps... etc.. (everything on facebook):

I'd like it all to be built right in on my desktop, maybe some gadgets etc, or instead of a Windows Wallpaper it would be an interface where I can drag and drop from my folder directly to the desktop and organize my goodies from there. It sounds very fun and I'd be like.. stuck on it all day just doing this and that.


They could call it... Active Desktop!

Joshie said,

They could call it... Active Desktop!

Ive been toying around with creating a .net application using the gecko rendering engine to integrate into the desktop in a manor smiler to active desktop... not the webpage as wallpaper part but the floating windows on desktop part... but like active desktop they always have the lowest z level basicly in todays context they would be called browser widgets... anyone interested in that kind of thing?

MS is crazy! Businesses cannot change OSs every two years and neither will I! They are trying to drive product sales through decreasing the version refresh cycle and it will fail. If 7 continues to be as stable as it so far appears then businesses may shift to it soon after SP1 is released, but remember that most businesses still running XP are doing it on 4 or 5 year old hardware and that's one of the big reasons they skipped Vista and its attached hardware upgrade costs. I'm not going to change from a stable OS in 2 years just because MS wants to pump their corporate dividend again.

Salgoth said,
MS is crazy! Businesses cannot change OSs every two years and neither will I! They are trying to drive product sales through decreasing the version refresh cycle and it will fail. If 7 continues to be as stable as it so far appears then businesses may shift to it soon after SP1 is released, but remember that most businesses still running XP are doing it on 4 or 5 year old hardware and that's one of the big reasons they skipped Vista and its attached hardware upgrade costs. I'm not going to change from a stable OS in 2 years just because MS wants to pump their corporate dividend again.

Um, between backwards compatibility and upgrade editions, it's perfectly reasonable to have new releases every 2-3 years. It allows new computer buyers to always have something brand-spankin' new, and existing computer buyers to affordably upgrade if they want to, or skip every other release knowing it won't limit their ability to use new 3rd party software.


And it's still cheaper than your average person's cigarette/fast food habit.

Edited by Joshie, Feb 1 2010, 11:47pm :

MS is always working on the next iteration, Neptune was spotted not long after Win2000, Longhorn was cooking as XP launched. Should really come as no surprise that they would be busy away on 8.

Osiris said,
MS is always working on the next iteration, Neptune was spotted not long after Win2000, Longhorn was cooking as XP launched. Should really come as no surprise that they would be busy away on 8.

Yeah, this article is about as pointless as the one saying that Apple is already working on 10.7. Of course they are!!

Music for my ears. Despite how new Windows 7 is and how much I love it, I'm already up for a new version ;-)

Windows 8 has been in the works for a little while, but it will not be released anytime soon. Just because someone builds another version, doesn't mean that there's some big secret that has been uncovered. For anyone to think or propogate that 8 will be released even RTM anytime before 3.5 to 4 years after 7 is ridiculous. The development cycles don't work that way with something that large and if it were released that quickly, the technical debt would be astronomical and microsoft would lose a ton of money while turning out a product that isn't that much different from 7.

Well if the rumors are true about this 2011 release, then that's terrible, because it means recycled Win 7! There absolutely no way that they can develop new kernel (7.0) in two years and therefore Win 8 would have to be based of kernel 6.1.
And secondly there's NO WAY in hell I'm buying another new license in 2011, I'll either stick to Win 7/Vista, or go back to a pirating again!

They've likely been working on it for a little bit now, and actually I'm sure its entirely possible to develop a new kernel within that timeframe. Just not likely, but 'no way' and 'not likely' are not the same so.. :)

DarkNovaGamer said,
They've likely been working on it for a little bit now, and actually I'm sure its entirely possible to develop a new kernel within that timeframe. Just not likely, but 'no way' and 'not likely' are not the same so.. :)

I agree...MS has a team whos goal is solely developing "future" products...meaning once the kernel was made for windows 7 they began on win8's kernel...which at that time win7 was probably still in pre-RTM phases..meaing they've had plenty of time to develop a new kernel, and chances are that by the time Win8 goes public beta that team will already be starting on "Win9" kernel if thats thier goal, while leaving a few of the developers behind for support of the beta development teams! at least I would hope so :p

Scout82 said,

I agree...MS has a team whos goal is solely developing "future" products...meaning once the kernel was made for windows 7 they began on win8's kernel...which at that time win7 was probably still in pre-RTM phases..meaing they've had plenty of time to develop a new kernel, and chances are that by the time Win8 goes public beta that team will already be starting on "Win9" kernel if thats thier goal, while leaving a few of the developers behind for support of the beta development teams! at least I would hope so :p

Well let's just say it's highly unlikely for Win 8 to RTM in 2011 IF it's a MAJOR release, Win7 was based of Vista's kernel, that's is why it only took them 2 years to polish off the RTM build.
Usually, or at list historically it takes Microsoft at least 3 full years to build a new kernel.

hal90001 said,

Well let's just say it's highly unlikely for Win 8 to RTM in 2011 IF it's a MAJOR release, Win7 was based of Vista's kernel, that's is why it only took them 2 years to polish off the RTM build.
Usually, or at list historically it takes Microsoft at least 3 full years to build a new kernel.

Too bad, Microsoft hasn't built a new windows kernel in 10yrs. Everyone after the original NT has just built on top of that one.

SharpGreen said,

Too bad, Microsoft hasn't built a new windows kernel in 10yrs. Everyone after the original NT has just built on top of that one.

*cough* Windows Phone 7 Series *cough*

If any capitalist dog lackey stooges are having trouble accessing Wzor, the nice riddle at the bottom says:
Don't be a dumbass, enter Ky! twice and gain entrance.

devHead said,
This is likely just the upcoming builds for the first Service Pack of Windows 7.

it is from the winmain branch.. not sp

warr10r said,
It could be a Service Pack...?

"It does not appear that these builds are service pack builds for Windows 7 SP1 as Wzor has confirmed those began from 7601.winmain_sp".

warr10r said,
It could be a Service Pack...?

Why would they jump the build number so much when SP1 could just be 7601?

DarkNovaGamer said,

Why would they jump the build number so much when SP1 could just be 7601?

Because a SP1 is very different than a new OS. While a SP is a revision of an exiting build, a new OS need different build number.

Borimol said,

Because a SP1 is very different than a new OS. While a SP is a revision of an exiting build, a new OS need different build number.

Isn't Vista SP1 just the same build number, just with a 1 at the end? Haven't got Vista installed to check but theres no need to jump 50 full build numbers for a SP. I mean hell, Pre-Beta versions of 7 were in the 6000's (around 6800 I believe).

DarkNovaGamer said,

Isn't Vista SP1 just the same build number, just with a 1 at the end? Haven't got Vista installed to check but theres no need to jump 50 full build numbers for a SP. I mean hell, Pre-Beta versions of 7 were in the 6000's (around 6800 I believe).

that is right
RTM= 6000
Vista SP1 = build 6001
Vista SP2 = build 6002
-----
Win7 preview 6800
beta 7000
RC 7100

the jump from 7600 (Windows 7 RTM build) to 7700 may suggest some kind of early milestone

The jump from 7600 actually seems to be from 7600 to 7650.

Northgrove said,
The jump from 7600 actually seems to be from 7600 to 7650.
Nah, I think 7600-7650 are just leading up to mid-September. Win7 RTMed back in July, iirc.

The Guardian said,
In no time we will start seeing comments like, "I think I will stick to XP"!!

Actually, I think I will stick to Vista, it's SO fast and stable... and everyone loves it.

phatphunky said,

Actually, I think I will stick to Vista, it's SO fast and stable... and everyone loves it.

+1 Windows 7 is too buggy for everyday use imo /s

Billus said,

+1 Windows 7 is too buggy for everyday use imo /s

Dont forget the "....But Apple did it first" comments /sarcasm

The Guardian said,
In no time we will start seeing comments like, "I think I will stick to XP"!!

I'll stick to with Windows 7. It'll be the new XP soon, hopefully. 8 will be another ME/Vista that not too many will upgrade to unless they introduce something big.

phatphunky said,

Actually, I think I will stick to Vista, it's SO fast and stable... and everyone loves it.


BWUAHAHAHAHA you're funny. Windows 7 is MUCH faster and MUCH stabler than Vista.

Scout82 said,

BWUAHAHAHAHA you're funny. Windows 7 is MUCH faster and MUCH stabler than Vista.

No way, see proof here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

Scout82 said,

BWUAHAHAHAHA you're funny. Windows 7 is MUCH faster and MUCH stabler than Vista.
actually in fact thats a big myth. I've had no problems with Vista on my old system where XP had so many slow down issues.

ShawnB said,

No way, see proof here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm


Then why did everyone blame vista when it was released???
now vista seems to be a good OS... I have used vista and win 7 and win 7 seems to be better to me.

still1 said,

Then why did everyone blame vista when it was released???
now vista seems to be a good OS... I have used vista and win 7 and win 7 seems to be better to me.

Because hating is a hobby for some people. :)

Billus said,

+1 Windows 7 is too buggy for everyday use imo /s

Does seem a bit freaky, now that I've had the chance to use it every day for a while. Had it on all 6 machines. Down to only one now. Granted, other 5 machines were about bare minimum specs for Windows 7. Ran great, if ALL I did was surf the net and read e-mails!

cork1958 said,

Does seem a bit freaky, now that I've had the chance to use it every day for a while. Had it on all 6 machines. Down to only one now. Granted, other 5 machines were about bare minimum specs for Windows 7. Ran great, if ALL I did was surf the net and read e-mails!

Any machine running Windows by minimum specs will certainly be a bad experience.

I mean, just check out the XP Professional reqs:
• PC with 300 megahertz or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233 MHz minimum required (single or dual processor system);* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, or AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended
• 128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)
• 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space*
• Super VGA (800 x 600) or higher-resolution video adapter and monitor
• CD-ROM or DVD drive
• Keyboard and Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device

buzz99 said,
Less than 2 years for the next Windows ? Gee, Microsoft has shifted devellopement to high gear !

Do so maths my friend. Windows 7 RTMd in July 2009. This article states the rumour for Windows 8 is July 2011. Thats 2 whole years, not "Less than 2".

Edited by Ryster, Feb 1 2010, 11:57am :

TCLN Ryster said,

Do so maths my friend. Windows 7 RTMd in July 2009. This article states the rumour for Windows 8 is July 2011. Thats 2 whole years, not "Less than 2".

Retail was in october...

buzz99 said,

Retail was in october...

Yeah, RTM and Retail are two different things. It did RTM on/around July, it 'Retailed' in October. :)

buzz99 said,
Less than 2 years for the next Windows ? Gee, Microsoft has shifted development to high gear !

Not really; Windows 2000 was released in February of 2000. Windows XP went retail in October of 2001.

devHead said,

Not really; Windows 2000 was released in February of 2000. Windows XP went retail in October of 2001.

Yes, but that was a bit of a fluke because Win2K wasn't in the consumer line (that was the Win9x line). XP was the combining of the corporate and consumer lines.

buzz99 said,
Less than 2 years for the next Windows ? Gee, Microsoft has shifted devellopement to high gear !

Maybe Windows 7 is just a Vista upgrade then!

wahoospa said,

Maybe Windows 7 is just a Vista upgrade then!

Oh good greif, and maybe Windows 7 is just NT 3.5 upgraded!

primortal said,

So wouldn't windows 8 retail in october as well?

Probably somewhere around there. They have to press the discs, print the packaging, assemble the SKU and ship it too. :)

buzz99 said,
Less than 2 years for the next Windows ? Gee, Microsoft has shifted devellopement to high gear !

No, I believe they've just gotten back on track. Vista took forever simply because of the amount of work it required, which we should certainly be happy for because... as much as we like to bash Vista, we wouldn't have Windows 7 without it.

devHead said,

Not really; Windows 2000 was released in February of 2000. Windows XP went retail in October of 2001.

ya but they made really big changes and not to mention it's still been used now so it's something that was much needed but Windows 8 already, come on. I mean come on M$ at least keep it a secret so I won't feel so ripped off.

buzz99 said,
Less than 2 years for the next Windows ? Gee, Microsoft has shifted devellopement to high gear !

I'd rather have them take their time and release something good rather than another Vista 2011.

MaSx said,

I'd rather have them take their time and release something good rather than another Vista 2011.

Amen, brother!

dead.cell said,

No, I believe they've just gotten back on track. Vista took forever simply because of the amount of work it required, which we should certainly be happy for because... as much as we like to bash Vista, we wouldn't have Windows 7 without it.

+1

MaSx said,
I'd rather have them take their time and release something good rather than another Vista 2011.
Vista took almost six years. Not a good comparison.

Edited by Kirkburn, Feb 2 2010, 8:58pm :

turk4n said,
Looks pretty much the same?

Hence the "Although nothing appears to have changed visually..." part of the article.

detoxa said,

What was you expecting ?


Exactly. UI changes are generally one of the last things done. At this stage, they would just be working on the under-the-hood stuff and adding in the new features, whatever they might be.