Windows 8.1 Update 1 build 17025 MSU leaked online

A few weeks after a MSU version of Windows 8.1 Update 1 got leaked to the Internet, it appears that a more recent build has also found its way to download sites. This build has the version number 9600.17025

The news was first posted by known Internet Windows leaker "WZor" on his Twitter account, who stated that the leak is for both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. As per Neowin's policy, we will not offer any direct downloads of this leaked build.

Last week, WZor posted up a screenshot of an earlier build of Update 1, with the version number 17019, and added that it had entered the escrow stage of development. That means that work on the update is basically done, save for perhaps a few more bugs. Obviously, the existence of this newer build means that Microsoft is still trying to fix some last minute issues.

Microsoft has still not confirmed anything about Windows 8.1 Update 1, which will add a number of improvements for the OS, including many that are designed to make using it with the keyboard and mouse better. Microsoft is expected to launch Update 1 sometime in early April.

Source: WZor on Twitter via Winbeta.org | Image via WZor

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows Phone App Studio Beta updated; now allows for Windows 8 app creation

Next Story

WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton's Facebook job application rejected in 2009

64 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

can anyone verifies whether the right click menu on wifi is there? i mean the menu which we can forget the network and seeing the properties of wifi we are connecting to.

My question: Are they going to add back the 'Fetch my files' that skydrive has in 8.0, that they removed from 8.1 for no good reason that I can fathom?

The Mesh had a feature where you could synchronize files across your machines but not have the file contents "in the cloud" which meant that they didn't count in terms of space usage. It did mean that Microsoft had to store the file metadata however.

SkyDrive never got this feature but instead got the "Fetch my file" feature which does something similar in that it provides a way of getting cloud-less files over the same infrastructure used to get cloudy files. It's particularly useful if both your machine and the other are behind firewalls and/or NAT devices.

Why MS don't keep a normal software versioning number. Like Windows 8.0, then Windows 8.1, then 8.2 and so on. Service packs sounded even cool in Windows 7.

mjedi7 said,
Why MS don't keep a normal software versioning number. Like Windows 8.0, then Windows 8.1, then 8.2 and so on. Service packs sounded even cool in Windows 7.

Even though I agree that the naming convention is starting to get a bit.... hard to understand, I believe update1 is supposed to bring bugfixes without changing too much to the UI........ even thought it is.....

Urgh okay nevermind, even I am not seeing it clearly....

mjedi7 said,
Why MS don't keep a normal software versioning number. Like Windows 8.0, then Windows 8.1, then 8.2 and so on. Service packs sounded even cool in Windows 7.

I think this is because you can buy 8.1 in a shop as a product. With packaging and all involved.
By offering this update as a download only this is not necessary.

Because 8.1 was a new OS. It installed like a new OS upgrade.

Windows 8.1 Update 1, however is a simple Windows update, like win7 service pack is.

To install 8.1, you have to format your drive or do an inplace upgrade. That's exactly like how you install a new OS and not a service pack.

So I have downloaded the leak but I don't know how to install it due to installing a previous leak. I'm not sure whether to install over the top or delete the previous updates.

Dunkleybwoy said,
So I have downloaded the leak but I don't know how to install it due to installing a previous leak. I'm not sure whether to install over the top or delete the previous updates.

Well, I hope you didn't install this on actual hardware... Installing the new leak should be a simple process of creating a new VM. Otherwise, you'll have to format whatever it is you're running the old leak on, and install fresh.

You can install it on top of your previous leaked update. I installed it on real hardware too. Just install it. You don't need to uninstall the previous leaked update. This update automatically replaces the previous update "magically"

That's why I am glad it is a MSU (Windows update) rather than a new OS (like 8.1 was)

I installed over the previous version and it updated fine. Make sure you restart every MSU.

In this order: KB2919442 > KB2919442-1 > KB2919355 > KB2932046

I don't know but I think we've seen everything there is to see in update 1 already. They might do some final touch up to things but as far as new features go I think we know it all.

George P said,
as far as new features go I think we know it all.
We do. They've reached RTM Escrow so feature complete, only bug fixes left.

Curious to see if we'll see it in March or if they'll push it back to April. Also I just wish they would name it Windows 8.2 This whole 8.1 Update 1 naming convention is confusing.

daz411 said,
Curious to see if we'll see it in March or if they'll push it back to April. Also I just wish they would name it Windows 8.2 This whole 8.1 Update 1 naming convention is confusing.

Actually they've yet to even say it exists officially, let alone what they'll call it.

Since its new functions, and not a compilation of previous patches, I think calling it updates blah blah blah is better than using 'Service Pack'.

But I think daz411 is right, calling it 8.2, etc would be a better idea. There's enough here for that I think.

I think they'd then feel compelled to call WP8.1 "WP8.2" which would seem a bit weird, skipping the .1 ... I think they're trying to keep things in sync, mostly. And most of the changes in Update 1 are fairly minor or cosmetic... not nearly the change from 8.0 to 8.1

Not if their plan is to sync with Windows Phone. The next release there is 8.1, so leaving Windows at 8.1 makes sense as they bring them in sync.

Shadowzz said,

It would but no Kernel update = no new Windows name.

That doesn't really mean anything and isn't a consideration. The kernel is updated by Windows updates all the time.

Well why not just call them both 8.2 then? It's not like the WP update isn't MASSIVE and sequentially this is the update after 8.1 for Windows, so in both cases 8.2 is better. Hell if it wasn't for keeping things in sync this would be WP9, so they could at least call it 8.2 to show it's more than just a simple update.

Brandon Live said,

That doesn't really mean anything and isn't a consideration. The kernel is updated by Windows updates all the time.


But a point increment? Windows 8.1 is NT 8.1 if MS would follow the old NT versioning scheme. Nothing worthy in Update 1 it seems that make it worth upgrading it to 8.2 or 9.

The OS "version" can be one thing and the kernel version can be another, look at most, if not all, Linux distros. It doesn't really matter what the two are, let alone if they match or not. This is why the OS is v8.1 but the kernel is 6.3. Maybe we'll see the kernel move up to 7.0 with Windows 9, or it could just be 6.4 or 6.5, it's no big deal.

It isnt a big deal. But Linux kernel versioning means nothing at all.
Microsoft always followed a versioning scheme for NT. Where a decimal increment meant a small update to NT kernel, and a full point increment basically means they overhauled the kernel.

Unlike Linux where 2.6 or 3.0 are completely meaningless to the amount of changes done to the kernel.

I'm still confused why people say this build will work better with the keyboard. The keyboard never stopped working in Windows 8, and the keyboard shortcuts in Windows 8, are the same as in Windows 7, in addition to a multitude of keyboard shortcuts that are exclusive to Windows 8.

The addition of caption buttons in Metro apps isn't going to make the keyboard anymore adept to the interface.

Edited by Dot Matrix, Feb 20 2014, 9:42pm :

Dot Matrix said,
I'm still confused why people say this build will work better with the keyboard. The keyboard never stopped working in Windows 8, and the keyboard shortcuts in Windows 8, are the same as in Windows 7, in addition to a multitude of keyboard shortcuts that are exclusive to Windows 8.

The addition of caption buttons in Metro apps isn't going to make the keyboard anymore adept to the interface.

After a quick checking of posts about this topic I got the impression that the phrase most of the people use is "keyboard and mouse" not just "keyboard".....

Fritzly said,

After a quick checking of posts about this topic I got the impression that the phrase most of the people use is "keyboard and mouse" not just "keyboard".....

Oh, so it's only half inaccurate then lol

Dot Matrix said,
I'm still confused why people say this build will work better with the keyboard. The keyboard never stopped working in Windows 8, and the keyboard shortcuts in Windows 8, are the same as in Windows 7, in addition to a multitude of keyboard shortcuts that are exclusive to Windows 8.

The addition of caption buttons in Metro apps isn't going to make the keyboard anymore adept to the interface.


Its a perception issue. I've found W8 to be very kb/m friendly as neither my laptop or desktop have touch screens. Part of the problem is Microsoft didn't explain how to use Windows 8 very well at all! Once you learn the corners, man, is it nice

Chikairo said,

Its a perception issue. I've found W8 to be very kb/m friendly as neither my laptop or desktop have touch screens. Part of the problem is Microsoft didn't explain how to use Windows 8 very well at all! Once you learn the corners, man, is it nice

What this guy said........hit the nail on the head

Metro works about as well with a mouse as the Desktop does with touch: it's feasible but it's not designed for that. Microsoft's own UX designer on that reddit thread a few days ago explicitely stated that Metro was optimized for keyboard and touch.

Jose_49 said,
What Windows 8 isn't very crap trackpad friendly... My trackpad is crap, and can't tolerate it -_-

Every Notebook trackpad and trackpad drivers are crap, no need to talk about a single case.

Andre S. said,
Metro works about as well with a mouse as the Desktop does with touch: it's feasible but it's not designed for that. Microsoft's own UX designer on that reddit thread a few days ago explicitely stated that Metro was optimized for keyboard and touch.

I disagree (I love 8.1) - it's not the start screen that's the problem it's navigation (and closing apps) which is very unintuitive with a mouse versus touch (I have a tablet too). In metroland it's pretty obvious it's 'touch first' and that needs some improvement (and it will come with time). For me these things aren't major but they could sure do with some love for people stuck with a mouse for primary input and MS recognise that.

dangel777 said,

I disagree (I love 8.1) - it's not the start screen that's the problem it's navigation (and closing apps) which is very unintuitive with a mouse versus touch (I have a tablet too). In metroland it's pretty obvious it's 'touch first' and that needs some improvement (and it will come with time). For me these things aren't major but they could sure do with some love for people stuck with a mouse for primary input and MS recognise that.

In 'metroland' it is actually more 'touch too' instead of 'touch first'. Just because controls are made larger for touch doesn't make them harder to use for mouse users.

Mobius Enigma said,

In 'metroland' it is actually more 'touch too' instead of 'touch first'. Just because controls are made larger for touch doesn't make them harder to use for mouse users.

Again, I disagree - and you're missing my point. MS wanted MUI to work for touch - it is after all the whole reason for it's existence (and why a new touch orientated framework needed to be built - neither WIN32/MFC/Forms/WPF work anywhere nearly as well for it). That they want to unify different devices isn't in question but there is no question on their motives.
8.x is so natural to use on my tablet - it's nothing to do with the size of the hit targets it's just that it's built around gestures which are decidedly clunky with a mouse. I can't 'swipe in' from off screen and grabbing an application and pulling it down feels nasty too.
This takes nothing away from all the fabulous power user hotkeys they added and the work they did for the desktop proper - it's just that MUI is obviously in a transitional state and needs more work (and hence we're seeing decent incremental improvements for it) outside of touch environments. What they're attempting is incredibly hard (and nobody else is even trying this) and it will take several iterations to iron things out. However be honest about their motives - they were nowhere in tablet (and phone to a lesser degree) and risk obsolescence if they didn't do something radical. I admire them for trying something new.

The problem with the mouse is the amount of movement to do things. Swipe from top, right click and then you have to move half a screen away to click the next thing. With touch that's fine; with the mouse a pain, often literally. Makes you wish touchpads were mirrors of the desktop (actual mini-screens) so clicking on them would mirror that point on the desktop. I think from what I've seen they are getting there with Update 1, quite tempted to find these updates and install it.

dangel777 said,
I disagree (I love 8.1) - it's not the start screen that's the problem it's navigation (and closing apps) which is very unintuitive with a mouse versus touch (I have a tablet too). In metroland it's pretty obvious it's 'touch first' and that needs some improvement (and it will come with time). For me these things aren't major but they could sure do with some love for people stuck with a mouse for primary input and MS recognise that.
That's pretty much what I was saying - I didn't explicitely mention the Start Screen. It's not clear to me what part of what I said you disagree with.

dangel777 said,

Again, I disagree - and you're missing my point. MS wanted MUI to work for touch - it is after all the whole reason for it's existence (and why a new touch orientated framework needed to be built - neither WIN32/MFC/Forms/WPF work anywhere nearly as well for it). That they want to unify different devices isn't in question but there is no question on their motives.
8.x is so natural to use on my tablet - it's nothing to do with the size of the hit targets it's just that it's built around gestures which are decidedly clunky with a mouse. I can't 'swipe in' from off screen and grabbing an application and pulling it down feels nasty too.
This takes nothing away from all the fabulous power user hotkeys they added and the work they did for the desktop proper - it's just that MUI is obviously in a transitional state and needs more work (and hence we're seeing decent incremental improvements for it) outside of touch environments. What they're attempting is incredibly hard (and nobody else is even trying this) and it will take several iterations to iron things out. However be honest about their motives - they were nowhere in tablet (and phone to a lesser degree) and risk obsolescence if they didn't do something radical. I admire them for trying something new.

Not exactly. There is ample support for touch in WinSxS and specifically WPF was also designed with touch being a priority.

Microsoft made the mistake with WPF to allow developers to build and create custom non-touch aware controls and interface elements, and didn't provide a real incentive to ensure touch was a consideration when building in WPF.

(There were several WPF Application released around Vista that catered just as much to touch users as mouse and keyboard users. Go look up the NYT WPF application or the Betty Crocker WPF application from that timeframe.)

All WinRT does is ensure it is a priority/required so touch users are NOT left behind by lazy developers.

As for gesture support, beyond the 'corners' feeling 'bad' to you, there really isn't any gesture or mouse support changes.

Just like Vista, Ctrl-Scroll Wheel still zooms in and out, and right click still works for contextual items, and on and on.

You are creating more of a separation in usability than what truly exists.

Mobius Enigma said,

Not exactly. There is ample support for touch in WinSxS and specifically WPF was also designed with touch being a priority.

WinSxS? What does the component store have to do with this?

WPF wasn't designed for multitouch at all - in fact support for it only appeared recently.

dangel777 said,

WinSxS? What does the component store have to do with this?

WPF wasn't designed for multitouch at all - in fact support for it only appeared recently.

Component Store?

WinSxS is the actual name of the Win32/Win64 subsystems that run the client OS and holds the Win32/Win64 kernel. NT is a client/server OS - there used to be OS/2 and Unix subsystems too.

People too often confuse the Win32 API with the Win32 subsystem, so by saying WinSxS it is a bit more accurate and stops users from confusing two entirely different things. Also with x64, it is also more accurate, as it isn't the Win32 subsystem, even though the name is still often used.


As for your history of WPF, maybe you don't realize what WPF is if you think it just recently got multi-touch. The framework had multi-touch support before it was released to the public back in 2006.

Mobius Enigma said,

As for your history of WPF, maybe you don't realize what WPF is if you think it just recently got multi-touch. The framework had multi-touch support before it was released to the public back in 2006.

Heh, nope. Although feel free to point me at something backing that up - one of the big things in 4.0 was touch support proper - not only that it had a co-dependency on Windows 7 and Visual Studio 2010. Before that the nearest you got was stylus support and certainly not multi-touch. Anyway you're still ignoring WinRT and MS' motives for creating it - namely that WPF sucks for touch period. It's big, slow and heavyweight and far from native - and that's before you consider the differences in the programming model (which again has touch as a 'priority' not as a bolt on afterthought). MS finally understood UX was all important - and that WPF was an inadequate solution. Not to say I don't have my problems with it (RT) - it's in it's infancy to say the least - but it's obvious at even a cursory level why it was built (heck, even why they needed a new system level API for it to sit on).

But really this is deviation from the points I raised - try watching an 80 year old woman using 8.1 and see where she struggles. It's not all bleak (as I went to pains to point out) but it's far from perfect (yet). We'll agree to disagree I think.


Edited by dangel777, Feb 25 2014, 4:29pm :

dangel777 said,

Heh, nope. Although feel free to point me at something backing that up - one of the big things in 4.0 was touch support proper - not only that it had a co-dependency on Windows 7 and Visual Studio 2010. Before that the nearest you got was stylus support and certainly not multi-touch. Anyway you're still ignoring WinRT and MS' motives for creating it - namely that WPF sucks for touch period. It's big, slow and heavyweight and far from native - and that's before you consider the differences in the programming model (which again has touch as a 'priority' not as a bolt on afterthought). MS finally understood UX was all important - and that WPF was an inadequate solution. Not to say I don't have my problems with it (RT) - it's in it's infancy to say the least - but it's obvious at even a cursory level why it was built (heck, even why they needed a new system level API for it to sit on).

But really this is deviation from the points I raised - try watching an 80 year old woman using 8.1 and see where she struggles. It's not all bleak (as I went to pains to point out) but it's far from perfect (yet). We'll agree to disagree I think.



The original release of WPF is also called .NET 3.0?

There is also an additional superset of WPF that was used on the tabletop 'surface' devices Microsoft created around 2004-2006. They were not only mulit-touch, but use imaging to see the touch points on the screen. (See PixelSense today.)

Vista and even TabletXP had multi-touch gestures and input.

However, what I think is confusing you is that Windows 7 brought in a new input model that inherently supported 50 touch points at a time with additional data on each point like size, pressure, shape, angle, mask, etc.

This is why you will find articles about the new 'multi-touch' features in Windows 7. However, the wording is tricking as it is the 'new version of multi-touch', not that Windows was finally getting multi-touch support. OK?


This driver technology came from the Microsoft Surface project (again the original tabletop 'surface' aka PixelSense today.) This is why 'technically' Windows is the most robust touch input OS today as Windows 8 evolved on this technology.

However that doesn't mean the precursor multi-touch input wasn't available on Vista, along with various different versions that even existed back on Windows XP TabletPC.

Windows 7 just got a new 'robust' version of driver technology, that is still years ahead of any other OS, as it can track far more than just 'touch'. The Pen/Ink/Stylus input model was also wrapped in the new 'input model' available on Windows 7, but that again doesn't mean that Pen/Ink/Stylus input didn't already exist, as it was crucial to XP TabletPC.

Start Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_PixelSense

Surface development began as early as 2004 using the 'pre-release' of Vista and the 'pre-release' of WPF with a new set of NUI drivers. The primary development took place in 2006 and even helped to shape features in Vista and WPF. The first release of Surface was in 2007 that RAN ON VISTA with applications DEVELOPED in WPF aka .NET 3.x.

It was the quintessential 'multi-touch' technology of the timeframe. So if you didn't get access to Multi-touch development until 2009, I feel sorry for you, as we were had many multi-touch projects that were commercially deployed and even used on the initial product release that was deployed in various Hotels and Casinos.

----

I agree that Windows 8.1 could have been more friendly to users, but the point was to get users to start thinking in a new way, and to force developers to not 'skip' touch like they did in the past, which WinRT doesn't allow them to do.

(Like I mention, Vista was more than touch ready, and Windows 7 was insanely touch friendly, but developers didn't give a crap and thus other than replicating mouse click and simple gestures, software didn't take advantage of all the new input technologies I had to offer. Microsoft truly had to force developers to get over that fence with Windows 8, or the tablet form factor would have been as bad as the Windows 7 Slates as the software wasn't there.)

With the changes at Microsoft, look for Windows 8/9 to turn into a quite clever platform that will erase the disconnects that some users are still having. The good thing that came from the 'forced' UX of Windows 8 is that developers and users have started to come around and see why it exists and understand that it a better model that just needs some polish.

Take care.

Mobius Enigma said,
The first release of Surface was in 2007 that RAN ON VISTA with applications DEVELOPED in WPF aka .NET 3.x.

I think what's confusing me is that we're now talking about an SDK that clearly lay outside of WPF, whereas your original point was that WPF was designed for touch - and if it was no SDK would be required to do it. Simple really. Worse, MS themselves state explicitly that the SDK could be used with "with almost any user interface framework." (see MSDN..). Again WPF 4.0 was the first version to explicitly target multi-touch (see MSDN..) i.e. it was baked in from the get go. Again, WPF was not explicitly designed for multi touch. End of.

Mobius Enigma said,
I agree that Windows 8.1 could have been more friendly to users

Great - progress - and this was my original point (which was really quite simple) that it is far friendlier in MUI land with touch in a number of ways. 8.1 already improved on 8.0 and I expect this to progress further in future editions. I still think there's a number of issues that are difficult to solve and hence why I brought up gestures being clunky with a mouse. It really wasn't controversial - it's a simple logical observation. But we'll agree (again) to disagree CAPITALS won't change that