Windows 8.1 build 9385 reportedly now on partner networks

Earlier this month, screenshots of the early development build of Windows 8.1 (also known as Windows Blue) were posted on the Internet after word got out that a partial leaked build made it on some private torrent trackers. Now there's word that a screenshot may show that the latest development build of Windows 8.1 has been released on the partner networks.

Winforum.eu's message board posted the image earlier today (whch we are not showing here here) which shows that the build number has gone up to version 9385, with the date of April 12th. The forum claims that the build was made available via Microsoft's partners on Sunday, April 14th and is the 64-bit ISO.

At the moment, there's no evidence that this newest build of Windows 8.1 has actually been leaked. However, if this information is correct, it shows that Microsoft continues to make steady progress on this major Windows 8 update. Microsoft is expected to launch a public preview of Windows 8.1 at its BUILD 2013 conference in late June, followed by its official launch sometime later this summer.

Source: Winforum.eu

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 8-based 13.3-inch Asus Taichi 31 dual screen notebook shipping

Next Story

Windows 8.1 may add app download progress bar under Live Tile

58 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Still unanswered with Windows-8 and its cutesy tiles metaphor. Can one run two applications simultaneous, each with their own window being displayed at the same time on the desktop? If not, Windows-7 will be around for a very long time. That feature is very important in many business-oriented applications. All the current blather talks about applications always being in full-screen mode.

TsarNikky said,
Still unanswered with Windows-8 and its cutesy tiles metaphor. Can one run two applications simultaneous, each with their own window being displayed at the same time on the desktop? If not, Windows-7 will be around for a very long time. That feature is very important in many business-oriented applications. All the current blather talks about applications always being in full-screen mode.

Stardock has an app for that too: ModernMix.

Of course you can... you can have as many open windows as you desire... as long as it's not Windows Store apps. You could do that in Windows 95

If Windows 7 is your alternative, then you're not talking about Windows Store apps.

Joshie said,
You didn't know you could have two apps side-by-side on your display at the same time...?

Can you have them windowed? I am sure it will come and the sooner the better.

The reason for all this endless complaining about the new start screen is no one likes jolting change. It's ahead of its own hardware in someways as it's design is leant towards touchscreen and the traditional form factors struggle with the change.

But...I think in the long run they've got it right. Touch is the way forward and it's forcing hardware designers more and more down this route. Everyone thought what the hell would you want and need an ipad for...now look at it. MS Surface continues this in the PC world.

Yes there are places where it doesn't work - Server 2012 is a strange place to have tiles right now but I suppose live tiles for server events is the way it's going to go.

I'd rather things move forward like this sometimes to force a new way of thinking otherwise everything would just merge into a grey mush of endless refining of a desktop concept which is over 20 years old now.

pingloss said,
rather things move forward like this sometimes to force a new way of thinking otherwise everything would just merge into a grey mush of endless refining of a desktop concept which is over 20 years old now.

Funny, Windows 8 has been out for over 6 months now and still the only real productivity applications and games run in the current refinement of a desktop concept which is over 20 years old now - The Windows 8 Desktop Environment, just sayin...

it shows that Microsoft continues to make steady progress on this major Windows 8 update

BREAKING NEWS: Software build number increases during development!

In other news, the Pope is revealed to be religious.

More at 10.

Microsoft should have made a OS just for tablets in the first place instead of messing with their bread and butte of the company. Ferrari wouldn't change their cars into hybrids just to compete with the market. You know what happened with Coca Cola when they changed their formula back then, people backlashed and Coca Cola went back to the old formula. Microsoft should know better, than to experiment with their main product!

lctb51 said,
Microsoft should have made a OS just for tablets in the first place instead of messing with their bread and butte of the company. Ferrari wouldn't change their cars into hybrids just to compete with the market. You know what happened with Coca Cola when they changed their formula back then, people backlashed and Coca Cola went back to the old formula. Microsoft should know better, than to experiment with their main product!

http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/0...s/ferrari-hybrid/index.html

lctb51 said,
Microsoft should have made a OS just for tablets in the first place instead of messing with their bread and butte of the company. Ferrari wouldn't change their cars into hybrids just to compete with the market. You know what happened with Coca Cola when they changed their formula back then, people backlashed and Coca Cola went back to the old formula. Microsoft should know better, than to experiment with their main product!

So, great. How is Microsoft supposed to move computing forward when you don't want them to change? Think about that. What good is Windows 7 going to do when I go buy a new PC in a few years that has evolved beyond what we use today? In order to grow, you HAVE to change. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Just replying to your statement since you weren't informed that Ferrari has hybrids. Why would Ferrari need a small engine when they are a race car? BTW, everyone else is doing it so why be the only ones stuck in the past?

Also, Coca Cola had to change their formula since they were putting illegal drugs into their drinks.

You cant move forward by radically changing something! Windows 7 is equivilant to Windows XP in every possible field! Quit it with saying Microsoft needed to create 8 to move forward, they did not move forward, they jumped backwards into quicksand with Windows 8!

Unlike Ferrari and Coca Cola, Windows is a base product to be extended, not an end-product like you've mentioned. The start screen is just another window of looking at what is going on in you digital life. You don't HAVE to like it. just create a start menu or use one of the many third-party apps that can do this for you. If you want to do it yourself, you can do the following:
Start Menu on WIndows 8
1. On the Desktop: right-click the toolbar, and choose New Toolbar
2. Navigate to: C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu
3. Select the Programs Folder and click select.
4. Viola! On the (right side) start menu you will see "Start Menu" with all your installed programs

Change should be gradual, not a "push you off the ledge" change. Apple has the right idea with gradually introducing changes. Microsoft is trying to make an immediate change to the PC landscape and people are resisting. No surprise there.

Before you come at me with some nonsense, I use Windows 8, and without a 3rd party start button.

Yes, people is SO RESISTIVE to changes...
I dont even understand what the big deal is.
8 is much better os than 7. And 8.1 will be better.
Im so happy i tried twice to remove the OS from this air... but this PC is built around the software and works better with OS X.
I use 8 on my work workstation (and work VM) thou. And its the best MS` OS yet.

lctb51 said,
You cant move forward by radically changing something! Windows 7 is equivilant to Windows XP in every possible field! Quit it with saying Microsoft needed to create 8 to move forward, they did not move forward, they jumped backwards into quicksand with Windows 8!

Windows 7 is far from equaling Windows XP. People are resisting Windows 7 too, because of the changes. Change happens one way or another, is unavoidable. Being afraid to change because of resistance is illogical.

The desktop is failing, people want quicker methods for getting their tasks done, and want none of the mess. Windows 7 failed to spur the market, and failed to spur app development. Windows 8 has been the opposite. Microsoft now has the Surface and Surface Pro making waves, and Windows 8 has been quite successful at regenerating app development. The Windows Store continues to grow, daily. It's full of apps and games, you're never going to find on a Windows 7 system.

These changes were needed, and fast. There was no "treading the waters" anymore.

Dot Matrix said,

People are resisting Windows 7 too, because of the changes.
Remind me, what's the most widely used desktop OS?

Dot Matrix said,

Remind me, why is XP still widely used?

Because it "just works" for a lot of people/corporations (nevermind China lol) so no drastic need to replace computers and train users for the changes from XP to 7 just yet, but it's slowly happening. (edit: they only have a year left for support, so they better hurry up lol) (edit2: you know 7 has passed XP in usage, right?)

Edited by ozzy76, Apr 15 2013, 7:39pm :

Dot Matrix said,

So, great. How is Microsoft supposed to move computing forward when you don't want them to change? Think about that. What good is Windows 7 going to do when I go buy a new PC in a few years that has evolved beyond what we use today? In order to grow, you HAVE to change. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.


Is it so difficult to understand is not the fact that something has changed but how people feel about these changes? If your office is moved in the basement you would not happy, if it was moved on a high floor with a beautiful view you would be much happier, wouldn't you?
Note that personally I am not against W8 although I can also see the need for a lot of improvements but all these statements that people are unable to accept "changes" is just silly; what changes bring on the table is what people are interested about, and rightly so.

ShareShiz said,
Just replying to your statement since you weren't informed that Ferrari has hybrids. Why would Ferrari need a small engine when they are a race car? BTW, everyone else is doing it so why be the only ones stuck in the past?

Also, Coca Cola had to change their formula since they were putting illegal drugs into their drinks.

Actually, Coca Cola still puts the same ingredient from the Coca Leaf that they always have into it. They are the only company in the US allowed to legally import the coca leaf into the US for this process.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07...-cola-obtains-its-coca.html

The last time Coca Cola changed their formula they were forced to change it back. The classic New Coke scenario that is the textbook story of why a business should never change its product radically without leaving both options on the table and gauging customer reaction first.

No matter what the "data" says. Since all of their research said more people loved New Coke and not Coca Cola. But after launching the product they market turned south to them extremely badly. This is what created the naming Coca Cola Classic.

Windows Nashville said,
Has boot-to-desktop been implemented yet?

how would anyone answer that without actually having the build to find out?

R3DL1N3 said,

LOL you are such a fail.

Why? He asked a question. Someone may of installed it already. Looks like it was available for a while. There is no evidence that this build has been leaked, but then again...no evidence it hasnt.

ShareShiz said,
Is the start menu back ?

/s

Don't forget Program Manager. How about a direct boot to the CLI? Microsoft needs to give users options!

/s

It's almost as if we live in a vacuum world where no third-party solutions exist.

This is WINDOWS we're talking about, the OS that's built to be compatible with as many third-party solutions as possible.

Windows Nashville said,
Has boot-to-desktop been implemented yet?

Wouldnt mind knowing that myself. Also would be curious if they will allow pinning of the apps to the task bar and allow them to be run in Window mode. Wishful thinking on part of this I am guessing, but a guy can dream.

Windows 8 is totally different than any other OS. Just admit Windows 8 is a complete debacle! You dont go messing with your bread and butter products! Windows 95 was a logical improvement over Windows 3.11, Windows 8 is an illogical improvement. The start menu made it much easier to find programs and was superior to program mananger! The start menu was logical because it was compact, small and convenient to use. Metro on the other hand is illogical because it takes up the whole screen and is inconvenient for desktop users. Windows 8 is failing becauser user will not adopt something so radical like metro! Comparing Metro to getting rid of the program manager are different things and have no relation, because they were focused on desktop users back then, not tablet users!

Dot Matrix said,

Don't forget Program Manager. How about a direct boot to the CLI? Microsoft needs to give users options!

/s

You are seriously mentally ill.

lctb51 said,
Windows 8 is totally different than any other OS. Just admit Windows 8 is a complete debacle! You dont go messing with your bread and butter products! Windows 95 was a logical improvement over Windows 3.11, Windows 8 is an illogical improvement. The start menu made it much easier to find programs and was superior to program mananger! The start menu was logical because it was compact, small and convenient to use. Metro on the other hand is illogical because it takes up the whole screen and is inconvenient for desktop users. Windows 8 is failing becauser user will not adopt something so radical like metro! Comparing Metro to getting rid of the program manager are different things and have no relation, because they were focused on desktop users back then, not tablet users!

If Microsoft never "messed" with their "bread and butter" products, then they wouldn't be where they are today, and you certainly wouldn't have Windows 7 to use right now. If Microsoft never "messed" with Windows, we would all still be suffering through a 3.11 like UX. Do you think about what you say before you post?

Dont ever compare changing Windows 7 into Windows 8, with Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. Windows absolutely did not need metro, the start menu works flawlessly. Windows 95 was designed for desktop users in mind where Windows 8 was designed for tablet users in mind! Windows 95 was a huge advance in the GUI OS back then, Windows 8 is not an advance. The purpose of changing Windows into Windows 8 was soley to compete with Ipad and Android markets! I am mesmerized that some people fail to see that Windows 8 was created to compete with Android and the Ipad!

Edited by Atomic Wanderer Chicken, Apr 15 2013, 5:47pm :

Wow, so much subjectivity being tossed around this thread as objective statements.

The Windows 8 UI is revolutionary. Whether a good revolution or bad doesn't change that fact. Some people want to boot to desktop, that doesn't make references to DOS appropriate (it's not the same, loading the Desktop is instant). Some people don't like Metro, that doesn't make references to Windows 3.11 appropriate (really, guys?).

lctb51 said,
Dont ever compare changing Windows 7 into Windows 8, with Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. Windows absolutely did not need metro, the start menu works flawlessly. Windows 95 was designed for desktop users in mind where Windows 8 was designed for tablet users in mind! Windows 95 was a huge advance in the GUI OS back then, Windows 8 is not an advance. The purpose of changing Windows into Windows 8 was soley to compete with Ipad and Android markets! I am mesmerized that some people fail to see that Windows 8 was created to compete with Android and the Ipad!

windows 8 was created because the desktop is failing. latest reports confirm that. it started with windows 7,and continued with windows 8. the people have spoken,they are tired of the clunky desktop. if windows 8 was not created,the desktop would die sooner. you should be kissing microsofts feet for extending the life of the desktop.

lctb51 said,
... Just admit Windows 8 is a complete debacle ...
You say debacle, I say worthwhile change.

The thing is, the Start menu hasn't been needed for a long time. I mean that in the terms of click Start, click All Programs, hunt for app. Since Vista you have been able to tap the Windows key and type the name of the document or application or favorite. This got better with 7 and further enhanced in 8.

For that reason alone, I have barely used the Start Menu since Vista in the conventional way it was used in WinXP and prior releases. I get that it is awkward on a mouse/keyboard setup the first time, but that can quickly be overcome without the need for Start Menu replacements.

If nothing changed, the internets would be yelling that Windows is dead and stale. There is nothing else they can do with it. Replace it, the year of Linux and/or Mac!

I don't see this as change for the sake of it, this is a change that is necessary for MS to merge its products under one house. Either spend all your energy hating it or a fraction of that energy giving it a shot. Your call.

@Azies It's not even hostility, it's ignorance and immaturity, part of what's ruining forums on Neowin. I'm sure he's asking because of the news story a couple days ago showing code in Windows Blue leak shows signs of allowing boot to desktop.

Dot Matrix said,

Don't forget Program Manager. How about a direct boot to the CLI? Microsoft needs to give users options!

/s

I actually get boot to CLI as the default in Windows Server 2012

lctb51 said,
Dont ever compare changing Windows 7 into Windows 8, with Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. Windows absolutely did not need metro, the start menu works flawlessly. Windows 95 was designed for desktop users in mind where Windows 8 was designed for tablet users in mind! Windows 95 was a huge advance in the GUI OS back then, Windows 8 is not an advance. The purpose of changing Windows into Windows 8 was soley to compete with Ipad and Android markets! I am mesmerized that some people fail to see that Windows 8 was created to compete with Android and the Ipad!
I can remember people bashing the UI because DOS works fine, I can also remember people bashing that startmenu and taskbar back then. What's your point again?

I don't remember people bashing the UI because DOS worked fine. Fanboys and zealots didn't exist like they do today. What I "do" remember, is how lacking Windows was in its early days, particularly with regards to software.

Business and everyone else clung to DOS because Windows had no applications with the functionality of Dbase, WordPerfect, or Lotus 1-2-3. When Windows had applications as capable as these, and not v1.0s, after these apps matured and could actually do more than their DOS counterparts, Windows then took off.

It is as simple as that.

Studio384 said,
I can remember people bashing the UI because DOS works fine, I can also remember people bashing that startmenu and taskbar back then. What's your point again?

vcfan said,

windows 8 was created because the desktop is failing. latest reports confirm that. it started with windows 7,and continued with windows 8. [...] if windows 8 was not created,the desktop would die sooner.

If they fail on the tablet market, all they would won, is annoyed desktop users.
And I'm sure lot of users that have adopted either ipad, or android tablets, took their time to find the apps they like the best, and aren't very interested to switch.
When android came just after the ipad, the thing that was new, is that it was open source, and not "locked" to a store to download apps.