Windows 8 M3 out-of-box experience and BSOD screenshots surface [Update]

A new screenshot of Windows 8 has surfaced, showing an early look at what Microsoft is planning for the newly styled Windows 8 out-of-box experience. The screenshot, which was posted in a thread on MyDigitalLife, is believed to have originated from the Chinese forum PCBeta. The above photo shows a departure from the traditional Aero Basic wizard dialogs as used in the post-installer stages of Windows Vista and 7, opting instead for a Windows Media Center-like appearance. The photo has been recreated in a Photoshop mockup by Neowin member Jimmy422 to give a better idea of what the OOBE will look like:

It is not yet known whether the boot-from-disc installer will indeed take on a similar appearance, or whether the appearance of the installer inside Windows has changed from earlier screenshots leaked late last month. There is another screenshot from the same thread which suggests this possibility, as shown below. The current boot-from-disc installer for Windows Vista and 7 uses fake Aero windows over a wallpaper.

In the same thread, MyDigitalLife user "canouna" has posted images of the new Black Screen of Death in Windows 8. The new design is extremely minimal, choosing to display only the faulting memory address location and the system file instead of information on what to do next, as was the case for previous Windows NT-based operating systems. However, this screenshot is not new and was spotted as early as late last month.

The same user has also teased an image of the new bootscreen for Windows 8, but most of the image is currently obscured. It is assumed the image will be revealed in the days to come.

Image Credit: MyDigitalLife

Update: Screenshots of the entire installation process for Windows 8 M3 have surfaced on the web through Chris123nt.com. The screenshots come from a 797x build. Judging from these screenshots, it appears that the boot-from-disc installer will indeed use this new styling.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Norio Ohga, ex-Sony chairman, passes away

Next Story

Comcast support gives out private details before verification

111 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I can't wait until the actual UI (both touch and mouse/keyboard) of Windows 8 is revealed (probably either at TechEd 2011 or PDC 2011)

I think a good solution would be an option to have old-style BSOD messages for experienced users and the new minimal BSOD for casual users.

Looks aight... the metro UI stuff looks (the back button in those pics) really nice, reminds of of WP7 but bigger. Wonder how it eventually will look in the final builds, would love to see the actual GUI with Metro fully incorporated in later builds.

A less informative BSOD would appeal only to eye-candy and design freaks. Otherwise, it's just hiding some potentially useful debug info. BSODs getting dumbed down? I'm not surprised.

xpclient said,
A less informative BSOD would appeal only to eye-candy and design freaks. Otherwise, it's just hiding some potentially useful debug info. BSODs getting dumbed down? I'm not surprised.

One of things about Windows is that it has a lot negative image associated with BSODs, when most people simply don't understand that most issues are not MS's fault, rather the publisher of the software or drivers they are using. So cleaning up the BSOD screen to make it prettier and less intimidating should negate some of that. What they will probably end up doing is make you press an F# key to show a more detailed report that will be useful for IT depts and troubleshooters.

xpclient said,
A less informative BSOD would appeal only to eye-candy and design freaks. Otherwise, it's just hiding some potentially useful debug info. BSODs getting dumbed down? I'm not surprised.

I don't understand how it is less imformative. I still see a stop error number, and the offending function displayed...

Frylock86 said,

I don't understand how it is less imformative. I still see a stop error number, and the offending function displayed...

To the average computer user, BSODs are not informative to begin with and are more relevant to the person who actually codes the offending source of the problem, whether its a driver or application.

xpclient said,
A less informative BSOD would appeal only to eye-candy and design freaks. Otherwise, it's just hiding some potentially useful debug info. BSODs getting dumbed down? I'm not surprised.

Actually, this makes it easier to diagnose problems. People are far more likely to understand a single error number and the offending component rather than a whole host of information that they don't understand. Not everyone is a tech enthusiast, you know.

They should make the BSOD a pretty blue...I know black still lets us use the BSOD abbreviation...but still, a fancy blue keeps things consistent

Very simple design and looks touch friendly too. I don't like that words like product key are not displayed in full though, hope that is not permanent. Another thing I like is how human the wording is throughout the wizards, very communicative.

To be honest, I am starting to think these leaks are coordinated (officially).

blachole said,
The BSOD image looks like the error screens on the Xbox360..

<mockpanic>
DOOOOOOOM!!!! THEY'VE REPLACED WINDOWS WITH THE XBOX OS!!!!!!!!!!!
</mockpanic>

blachole said,
The BSOD image looks like the error screens on the Xbox360..

<mockpanic>
DOOOOOOOM!!!! THEY'VE REPLACED WINDOWS WITH THE XBOX OS!!!!!!!!!!!
</mockpanic>

scaramonga said,

No, they gave it an new image

Lol not sure if thats sarcasm or not, but. I never thought of the BSOD as an image. Thought of it more as a serious error rather than a "Oh im sorry your computer crashed, we will fix it for you momentarily by restarting" kind of deal. If that makes sense

Am I the only one that sees an extremely fast/heavy dude development going on in Windows 8??
And remember this is only leaks, we do not even know what they are currently working on right now.

I know the estimated release date it may happen sometime in late 2012 but with that speed I am not going to be surprise if they hit Beta 1 to Beta 3 from June to November and hit the market with RTM on December of 2011 just in time for holidays...

Hard to happen yes. Impossible NO especially with that development speed.

They rushed with Vista; let's not have that happen again. They took their time with thoroughly testing Windows 7 during its beta/RC stages and it showed upon release.

Denis W said,
They rushed with Vista; let's not have that happen again. They took their time with thoroughly testing Windows 7 during its beta/RC stages and it showed upon release.

ok The beta was rushed with vista but Longhorn/Vista was infact too much heavy development going on to the point that most of the team had no idea what the other half was doing.. It ending up being scraped after 3 year in and redesiged again.

poor WinFS never made it past Build 4038/4053.

Longhorn looked the best at build m3 4008

Denis W said,
They rushed with Vista; let's not have that happen again. They took their time with thoroughly testing Windows 7 during its beta/RC stages and it showed upon release.

I don't know where you got that information from that Windows Vista was rushed considering its development spanned 5 years. Vista's problem was perception, the reset in August 2004 left a bad taste in many OEM's, IHV's and ISV's mouths, they saw the Longhorn development as too much of a moving target. You know what they did? They ended up waiting until the OS actually RTMed before they started writing drivers and updating applications to support the OS, considering that the first frozen build was released at WinHEC 2005 and beta 1 in August of 2005, beta 2 May 2006, RC August 2006, RC 2 October 2006. A lot of the issues were fixed within the first 6 months of its release, but the damage was already done though although I personally never had any issues with Vista from the beta up to the time I upgraded to Windows 7.

WolvesHunt said,

ok The beta was rushed with vista but Longhorn/Vista was infact too much heavy development going on to the point that most of the team had no idea what the other half was doing.. It ending up being scraped after 3 year in and redesiged again.

poor WinFS never made it past Build 4038/4053.

Longhorn looked the best at build m3 4008

It wasn't really case of the team not knowing what they were doing, but they were too ambitious and were building features on top of features when they should have set out a feature set, stuck to it, code it, test it for regressions, along the way, certain things like performance were being neglected, although, OEM's did preload it on some crappy systems.

Mr. Dee said,

I don't know where you got that information from that Windows Vista was rushed considering its development spanned 5 years. Vista's problem was perception, the reset in August 2004 left a bad taste in many OEM's, IHV's and ISV's mouths, they saw the Longhorn development as too much of a moving target. You know what they did? They ended up waiting until the OS actually RTMed before they started writing drivers and updating applications to support the OS, considering that the first frozen build was released at WinHEC 2005 and beta 1 in August of 2005, beta 2 May 2006, RC August 2006, RC 2 October 2006. A lot of the issues were fixed within the first 6 months of its release, but the damage was already done though although I personally never had any issues with Vista from the beta up to the time I upgraded to Windows 7.

Granted Vista was more towards a revolutionary than an evolutionary release (compared to Windows 7 and 8, in my opinion), but that's just it: the rush happened because of the previous practice of people allowed to check in work-in-progress code into winmain, unlike now where code must be in almost perfect-working condition before it goes there. Plus, as you said, originally they were developing with goalposts constantly moving - at least before the code reset occurred.

Also all the CTPs and betas and two RCs - compare how Vista was at the beginning of Beta 1 and how it ended up as RTM. Now use the same comparison with Windows 7. Was the development a lot more rushed with Vista than it was with 7? Indeed it was. And yes, I acknowledge that 7 had a much better time with being ready with drivers, and I also acknowledge that fault did lie with the hardware makers and OEMs - they weren't solely at fault for Vista's initial sloppy launch though as some things from my vague memory of Vista RTM's launch stood out (DWM frequently became flakey and required a service restart, the double UAC dialogs for file transfers, excessive disk thrashing on desktop boot).

Regardless, history speaks for itself: Windows 7 from beta to RC had only a few small tweaks here and there, and the final product wasn't that far off from the public beta.

Denis W said,

Granted Vista was more towards a revolutionary than an evolutionary release (compared to Windows 7 and 8, in my opinion), but that's just it: the rush happened because of the previous practice of people allowed to check in work-in-progress code into winmain, unlike now where code must be in almost perfect-working condition before it goes there. Plus, as you said, originally they were developing with goalposts constantly moving - at least before the code reset occurred.

Also all the CTPs and betas and two RCs - compare how Vista was at the beginning of Beta 1 and how it ended up as RTM. Now use the same comparison with Windows 7. Was the development a lot more rushed with Vista than it was with 7? Indeed it was. And yes, I acknowledge that 7 had a much better time with being ready with drivers, and I also acknowledge that fault did lie with the hardware makers and OEMs - they weren't solely at fault for Vista's initial sloppy launch though as some things from my vague memory of Vista RTM's launch stood out (DWM frequently became flakey and required a service restart, the double UAC dialogs for file transfers, excessive disk thrashing on desktop boot).

Regardless, history speaks for itself: Windows 7 from beta to RC had only a few small tweaks here and there, and the final product wasn't that far off from the public beta.

Still hard to say it was rush, it still turned out a great product, its just the drivers weren't there in January 2007, the systems being released by royalty OEM's were crappy, 512 MBs of RAM on a brand new DELL laptop. That was ridiculous!

I'm just wondering why people think this is a BSOD anyways?, It could easily be an installation error during the install. I mean is it confirmed BSOD?...not that an early build would be without issues, i find a lot of people speculate.

Look at the error a bit closer, device driver taking out the system and generating a dump file. A random application or installer crash wouldn't do that.

Jen Smith said,
Look at the error a bit closer, device driver taking out the system and generating a dump file. A random application crash wouldn't do that.

It's not a random application though, it's the first load of the system onto a hd, it could be a rollback and a "Send report to m$ why this happened report/internal debug", All I'm saying is, windows gets a lot of bsod stick, perhaps benefit of the doubt works here.

I just ain't gonna call any error in a blue screen with a error code on a system file as a bsod, specially not on a plethora of installation shots.

Ci7 said,
BSOD?

did you mean Black screen of death? it doesn't look to me blueish....

Panda X said,
Black also starts with B

Comment(s) of the year, without question.

Ci7 said,
BSOD?

did you mean Black screen of death? it doesn't look to me blueish....


What did you expect them to call it, a KSOD? (Think CMYK...)

Microsoft looks like they've finally got a good team of UI designers that knows what they are doing.
I love the new look, it's so clean.

Well it looks nice I will give it that. Now lets hope it backs itself up with a few good updates to Explorer so we can categorise and maintain our files better.

Maybe the accessibility button is instead a timer showing how much of the install is left? Or maybe it's a CD-ROM showing when the drive is being accessed. Possibly.

Windows 8 already? I love 7 and I'm not ready for another version, but will without a doubt, install 8 the very minute it becomes available in some form or another.

shle896 said,
Windows 8 already? I love 7 and I'm not ready for another version, but will without a doubt, install 8 the very minute it becomes available in some form or another.

Well, Windows 7 will not magically expire when Windows 8 is released, you can continue running for as long as you want.

causa45 said,
Imo, a weekly update on Windows 8 would be better than all these scattered minimalistic "news" on it.

u r not a WinLover... let us be

causa45 said,
Imo, a weekly update on Windows 8 would be better than all these scattered minimalistic "news" on it.

Would you rather an update to fix things come as soon as possible or would you like to see that its finished but wait for the weekly update? I personally would like to see them as soon as they are finished.

DarkNovaGamer said,

Would you rather an update to fix things come as soon as possible or would you like to see that its finished but wait for the weekly update? I personally would like to see them as soon as they are finished.

Oops, my bad. Misread the original comment as something more along the lines of 'windows updates' and not windows 8 updates.

They finally change the BSOD, I don't suffer from it but it's good to see improvements in this area. It looks the whole Windows's look is changing, looking forward to see what's the final outcome. Now more than ever I'm considering to buy a Tablet PC by the end of the year

daniel_rh said,
They finally change the BSOD, I don't suffer from it but it's good to see improvements in this area. It looks the whole Windows's look is changing, looking forward to see what's the final outcome. Now more than ever I'm considering to buy a Tablet PC by the end of the year

I have a Win7 slate, but I will def consider a Win8 one as well.

allwynd said,
i cant wait to experience the BSOD, such a nice design..

If Windows 8 runs like Windows 7, I'll probably never see it anyway...

Wow man, brings back memories of the EARLY Windows 95 betas when you'd get all the way through setup on a bogus key, or maybe no key at all at that point but you'd get this install done then BAM - BSOD.