Windows 7 reaches build 7068

A Microsoft Employee, in his blog post explaining about the new Windows 7 Gadgets platform, ended up posting the initial Windows 7 build 7068 screenshot. The screenshot is just the Windows 7 Desktop but the build string is clearly visible - 7068.winmain.090321-1322 - which means that this build 7068 was compiled on March 21, 2009.

It was also rumored earlier that Windows 7 build 7068 is released on Microsoft Connect to a select group of testers. WinFuture reports that this build might have been released to the Windows 7 TAP Customers, who get involved closely with Microsoft in beta testing their products.

With builds rapidly progressing, we still have more chances that Microsoft may confirm its Windows 7 RC Escrow build at the end of April.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Go! USB Sound Card review

Next Story

Twitter makes it to your car, courtesy of OnStar

88 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Yeah I'm running 7068 x64 bit, and it is a lot faster than 7057, although it took me 2 hours for it to upgrade because I had a lot of files to move.

a bit of news from wzor
6.1.7068.0.winmain.090321-1322 - search for in public torrents.
6.1.7069.0.winmain.090323-1630
6.1.7070.0.winmain.090324-1853
actual build:
6.1.7071.0.winmain.090326-1750

It's legit, I just installed x64 7068 to my lappy and it's working a treat. Could be my imagination but it installed quicker.

I have noticed 7086 has appeared trying to workout if someones messing around with a couple of digits or is it legit?
Anyone else spotted it or further info?

verved said,
I have noticed 7086 has appeared trying to workout if someones messing around with a couple of digits or is it legit?
Anyone else spotted it or further info?

It's just an accident... 7086... 7068.. see those 2 digits inverted.... calm down.

800x384.. uhmm.. I guess it's running onto a sony vaio p.. if you multiply that resolution by 2 you get 1600x768 which is infact the screen res of that sony vaio. Moreover I see 2 cpus in the system stat widget, which are the 2 logical cores of the Intel Atom.. :P

Eraser85 said,
800x384.. uhmm.. I guess it's running onto a sony vaio p.. if you multiply that resolution by 2 you get 1600x768 which is infact the screen res of that sony vaio. Moreover I see 2 cpus in the system stat widget, which are the 2 logical cores of the Intel Atom.. :P

Thats because of HT

I am downloading also but through Rapidshare, so as of right now I don't know if it is real or fake on there but when I'm finished downloading I'll let u guys know!

Oh man. I can't wait until Windows 7 goes retail. I've really enjoyed using the beta, but it expires at the end of next month I think. I should just re-install Vista and use that until Windows 7 goes retail.

The RC build will expire in the middle of next year. I would try the public RC build when it is released. That is what I am planning on doing.

Dannydeman said,
7100 will be the RC1 build..
7500 will be the RTM build..

(yes it is true)

Not true, since they make approx. 1 build a day. Then it would take like 1 year till RTM release.

TomppaG said,

Not true, since they make approx. 1 build a day. Then it would take like 1 year till RTM release.

Build numbers are often modified upon a large release. Do you think it's pure coincidence that beta 1 got that nice round 7000 number?

Or Vista got build nr 6000? Or XP build nr 2600?

Ceru said,
Build numbers are often modified upon a large release. Do you think it's pure coincidence that beta 1 got that nice round 7000 number?

Or Vista got build nr 6000? Or XP build nr 2600?

I reckon they might bump it to 7777 for release

Kirkburn said,
I reckon they might bump it to 7777 for release :)

I leaning more towards 7200.

I'm thinking that Microsoft wants to make a point, showing off that their new development process works and that Beta 1/RC 1 was already nearly final release material.

(Written down here. So I can spam the forums when W7 is released, emphasizing with my awesome psychic abilities.)

Incorrect. You and everyone else who downloaded build 7000 are not "Official Beta Testers". You were merely given the chance to download the Windows 7 Beta Build 7000 from Microsoft for a limited time. That by no means makes you an official beta tester nor it gives you the rights entitled to one. The "real" beta testers work for Microsoft and stay assured, they are up to date with the latest builds.

Neroscent said,
Incorrect. You and everyone else who downloaded build 7000 are not "Official Beta Testers". You were merely given the chance to download the Windows 7 Beta Build 7000 from Microsoft for a limited time. That by no means makes you an official beta tester nor it gives you the rights entitled to one. The "real" beta testers work for Microsoft and stay assured, they are up to date with the latest builds.


Well if you are a technet or msdn member you are a semi official beta testers we get to post our bugs from the beta build to microsoft connect.

Neroscent said,
Incorrect. You and everyone else who downloaded build 7000 are not "Official Beta Testers". You were merely given the chance to download the Windows 7 Beta Build 7000 from Microsoft for a limited time. That by no means makes you an official beta tester nor it gives you the rights entitled to one. The "real" beta testers work for Microsoft and stay assured, they are up to date with the latest builds.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there are a TON of Windows 7 Beta testers on Connect who DO NOT work for Microsoft, and they still only have access to 7000.

Thanks for trying to look like your so smart, but you are wrong.

NinjaGinger said,
Does it still block 3rd party codecs like 7057 did?

I hope so. I want to keep reading thread after thread where people whine about this pointless fact. It's fun.

:No-Frost: said,
Hope they fix the refresh rate issue that windows xp and vista has... (Yes, I'm still using a CRT monitor =(... )

What refresh rate issue?

Why should anyone have to buy a new monitor when what they have still works?

I still use a 22" CRT for photography work as current LCDs can't touch the color accuracy of a CRT.

iamwhoiam said,
Why should anyone have to buy a new monitor when what they have still works?

I still use a 22" CRT for photography work as current LCDs can't touch the color accuracy of a CRT.

Not even close to true. S-IPS/H-IPS panels have far surpassed CRT monitors in every area.

"Not even close to true. S-IPS/H-IPS panels have far surpassed CRT monitors in every area."

I still use 2 23" P1100 CRT's , and I still can't justify the cost of One let alone Two S-IPS's. That being said, come moving day I would trade them in a heartbeat!

iamwhoiam said,
Why should anyone have to buy a new monitor when what they have still works?
But is it working? I haven't heard of any issues in XP or Vista and had they had incompatibilities with CRT people would have made a huge deal of noise about it, especially back around 03 when LCD's weren't necessarily mainstream yet.

I think it's better they keep them out. If 7 can natively decode divx, xvid, etc..then why would I even want to install something else? I think a lot of problems arise by using 3rd party codecs..so MS FINALLY said, "hey, we'll just include them."

darkmanx21 said,
I think it's better they keep them out. If 7 can natively decode divx, xvid, etc..then why would I even want to install something else? I think a lot of problems arise by using 3rd party codecs..so MS FINALLY said, "hey, we'll just include them."

What if I don't want to use the "native" codecs? ever heard freedom of choice?

LOL! Yeah ... I agree. I want everything neat and tidy anyway The only likely unplayable videos will be pirated movies from the net. That said ... for things like custom codecs in games ... what'll happen there?

You're free to use a third party piece of software there are plenty there

- Microsoft was tired of 3rd party codecs destroying playability on WMP (I've had to fix countless cases of this inside my family alone) so they're locking down the majority of them so they KNOW they'll work.

That is that's true IF this is a perment feature and not a lock-down meant only for MS employees because you guys are using a LEAKED BUILD meant only for internal testing - maybe they wanted employees to make sure there were no bugs attached to the core Codecs they compiled and didn't want anyone accidentally writing over them and confusing bug reports.

Rolith said,
maybe they wanted employees to make sure there were no bugs attached to the core Codecs they compiled and didn't want anyone accidentally writing over them and confusing bug reports.


Testing with third party codecs is just as important (if not MORE!) as testing with the included codecs. Do you honestly think Microsoft doesn't want their testers testing real-world useses of the system? That's nuts.

"- Microsoft was tired of 3rd party codecs destroying playability on WMP"

Unfortunately, most of these 3rd party codecs exist BECAUSE the MS ones have been incompatible **** in many cases. Divx and Xvid exist after all for a reason.

So, while I agree with the concept of locking this down for the vast majority of noob end-users, professionals and experts had better have a way of canning any (potentially) poorly implemented MS codec or there's going to be hell to pay...especially in the high end (and highly visible) Hollywood production community.

We have MUCH higher standards than typical home video end users and the MS codecs in the past (MPEG2 and/or Blu-Ray anyone?!) have been inconsistent to say the least.

:)

nonick said,
What if I don't want to use the "native" codecs? ever heard freedom of choice?

I thought the issue so far was that the codecs only didn't work in MS's media player and media center (as per 1st post in this topic )...not that you couldn't get unsupported media formats working what so ever? If so then you still have a choice...it just means using a separate player. It also means things like games would be unaffected.

I think people are jumping the gun here anyway given it's Beta and MS hasn't come out and announced anything yet.

darkmanx21 said,
I think it's better they keep them out. If 7 can natively decode divx, xvid, etc..then why would I even want to install something else?

Microsoft's codecs aren't fully compatible with all the variants of xvid and various other codecs out there, they are not enough. And what does "natively" mean? Windows 7 doesn't use kernel-level drivers for graphics, third party codecs are on a level playing field with Microsoft's own.

can't wait for Windows 7, think it will be their best release since XP ... the only thing they could get wrong is the pricing =P

Not if you hide the taskbar. I always have the taskbar hidden and have a clock on the desktop. Hidden taskbar means more space on your screen, as little as it is.

I find most desktop gadgets redundant as I'm normally using the PC, and not just sitting staring at a desktop.

bod said,
I find most desktop gadgets redundant as I'm normally using the PC, and not just sitting staring at a desktop.

+1

I hope they've improved the Gadget API, and that *they* (Microsoft) actually put out some more Gadgets that integrate with their products, particularly Outlook (the Vista one is pretty mediocre), Messenger, and Windows Media Player. Of course, Gadgets never worked for me when I was running 7000, so it may be awseome now and my point is moot...

bod said,
I find most desktop gadgets redundant as I'm normally using the PC, and not just sitting staring at a desktop.

+1. Indeed. Dashboard on the Mac is a better concept, but pretty much just as useless IMO.

bod said,
I find most desktop gadgets redundant as I'm normally using the PC, and not just sitting staring at a desktop.


They work well for me because I have 3 monitors. Development takes 2 monitors and my 3rd is for music, IM, etc. I understand the few people have two monitors let alone three... so your point is still valid. Just making the exception rule.

Peace,
James

bod said,
I find most desktop gadgets redundant as I'm normally using the PC, and not just sitting staring at a desktop.

thats because you don't have multiple monitors. I keep the sidebar on the second so when I'm gaming or working with lightroom I can see the cpu/ram usage, time, and clipboard.

Windows7even said,
isint having 2 clocks kinda redundant?

I find it fairly useful since I often organize video game tournaments with a few Europeans, this way I check the time of multiple timezones just by looking at the desktop. I have all of the US timezones and a european timezone as well.

Omen1393 said,
I find it fairly useful since I often organize video game tournaments with a few Europeans, this way I check the time of multiple timezones just by looking at the desktop. I have all of the US timezones and a european timezone as well.


Windows 7 now allows you to store several different cities times, just by clicking on the clock on the Superbar you can then see all added cities.

Markus-J said,
Windows 7 now allows you to store several different cities times, just by clicking on the clock on the Superbar you can then see all added cities.

Vista can do that too.

I never had problems with Vista as well though. It wasn't that slow at all, and it is way better then XP if you ask me. Windows 7 is even better then both XP and Vista, I use 7057 as main-os and it works great!

i have been using seven, and i must say that i'm impressed by what i see so far. as long as it doesn't go backward i'll buy it ... i passed on vista after having a terrible time during the betas then a sh*t of a time with the retail version on numerous friends pc's that just shat themselves.

buuuut seven looks and runs great. well done microsoft.

After toying with the Beta's a little ... well ... enough .... I'm DEFINITELY buying Windows 7. I own Vista Ultimate and while I'm not dissapointed with it as much as some, since I only paid £19 for my full boxed licence (MS Employee store), I am definitely feeling Windows 7's incredible performance boosts and slick changes over Vista.

Count me in! W00t!

Kinda depends on that dumb superbar. Looks like widgets in the screen cap up above. Always wondered why the sidebar program is in Windows 7 public beta. Although it clearly doesn't work. Now I know. I prefer the sidebar to the confusing superbar. I don't like grouping my taskbar windows together. Superbar doesn't leave me much choice.

The superbar and sidebar are 2 completely different things. The superbar serves the purpose of a taskbar with better functionality, it brings a flavor of the taskbar and dock together into it's own self. The sidebar is no longer present in Windows 7, there are no sidebar gadgets, simply desktop gadgets, and they may be aligned to the right side of your screen automatically, but they still don't reside on a sidebar. They can be resized to be small or large, small could be used for the right side of your screen, they could be made large if they are just hanging on the desktop. These desktop gadgets are very nice, and the superbar also makes a great experience by giving you a simpler way of reaching your most used apps, and it grows on you with the grouping feature, you just got to get used to it and after that you love it.

Electric Bolt said,
the superbar also makes a great experience by giving you a simpler way of reaching your most used apps, and it grows on you with the grouping feature, you just got to get used to it and after that you love it. :)
I don't think so. I tried the super bar for two months, but reverted back to icon and name style. It is just slower to click, identify a thumbnail, and click again. And if you have several similar looking windows open in the same group (for instance explorer windows) identifying via thumbnail is even slower.

GamblerFEXonlin said,
I don't think so. I tried the super bar for two months, but reverted back to icon and name style. It is just slower to click, identify a thumbnail, and click again. And if you have several similar looking windows open in the same group (for instance explorer windows) identifying via thumbnail is even slower.


You don't have to click on a thumbnail group. Just mouseover it.

How is it slower to identify multiple Explorer windows? You can still see the folder names, if that's what you were getting at.

rm20010 said,
You don't have to click on a thumbnail group. Just mouseover it.

How is it slower to identify multiple Explorer windows? You can still see the folder names, if that's what you were getting at.

also change mousehoverdelay to 50 in registry (google for it)

I have been running it as my main OS since before build 7000 on my laptop and workstation and it runs awesome. No issues and I like it much better than Vista.