Windows 8.1 update 2 said to arrive on August 12th

Over the past few weeks, Windows 8.1 update 2 has been referenced many times, but so far, no one has been able to figure out what all the update includes. It seems that this update will be small, when compared to update 1, and may only include enhancements to stability rather than front end features. 

If you are wondering when update 2 will arrive, that is, after all while you are reading this post, thanks to some leaked information from our Russian friends, update 2 should arrive in August. Specifically, the update should be part of 'Patch Tuesday' which is the 12th of the month.

The image you see above comes from a Russian source and is said to be authentic, although, we cannot confirm that image is genuine Microsoft documentation. But, based on everything we had heard prior to this document surfacing, it aligns perfectly to that information.

While this update appears to be quite small, Threshold, the next big update to Windows, is starting to come into focus and you can read more about some of our scoops on what to expect with the update, here.

For now, know that update 2 is right around the corner but don't expect much with the update unless Microsoft has found a way to avoid the leaks that generally reveal what is in each update.

Source: PCPortal.org.ru

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Rumored 12in Macbook Air with Retina Display may not ship this year

Next Story

Jibo the family robot aims to bring affordable robot technology into your home

86 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Windows 8.1 Update 1 Update? come on microsoft. Naming is their main problem now i think. But i like how they did this, they make another update so Windows version feels more rapid and updated. This update should give us a breath to waiting win 9.

Windows RC 8.2, the true Windows 8 RTM will be known as Windows 9. After that your Windows OS may very likely go into the cloud, good luck with that when it rains...Classic Shell and startisback, along with deviantart, made my Windows 8.x PCs workstations. Seems Microsoft learned nada when polishing up Windows 7 for RC and RTM, I am glad I did.

If only small improvement better microsoft just update it silently. No need to name it update 2, update 3 and others.
Microsoft need to make it Slimmer and lighter.
and also more secure from Malware.
and also better Search function, look at the Everything search from void tools

Will be really annoying if they actually call it "Update 2", if but only for the fact that they were so goddamn adamant about not referring to the 8.1 Update as "Update 1"...

dead.cell said,
Will be really annoying if they actually call it "Update 2", if but only for the fact that they were so goddamn adamant about not referring to the 8.1 Update as "Update 1"...

Because MS is frustrated at software developers and corps who refuse to upgrade and then stomp their feet and throw a hissy fit when they do not get support or updates.

Since apps need to be certified and corps like 5 years after every each os or service pack release it will cause a nightmare of QA testing 20 combinations of everything. However calling it an update then is different and corporations will be more likely to upgrade and software does not need to be recertified.

With a new agile software release schedule it is causing problems. IE 8 is still the defacto standard and IE 9 is now just being evaluated at these companies. A new release every year is pissing people off and causing them to grip on tight on ancient browser versions. So MS is trying to end this problem.

Call it XP syndrome. Right now Windows 7 is it and mark my words 7 will stay much longer than XP. Expect it still to be significant in 2025.

McoreD said,
Let's call this Windows 8.1.2 because really that's what it is.

Indeed. OS X is updated in increments like this. It is easy to follow (10.9.3 --> 10.9.4).

sinetheo said,

Because MS is frustrated at software developers and corps who refuse to upgrade and then stomp their feet and throw a hissy fit when they do not get support or updates.

Since apps need to be certified and corps like 5 years after every each os or service pack release it will cause a nightmare of QA testing 20 combinations of everything. However calling it an update then is different and corporations will be more likely to upgrade and software does not need to be recertified.

With a new agile software release schedule it is causing problems. IE 8 is still the defacto standard and IE 9 is now just being evaluated at these companies. A new release every year is pissing people off and causing them to grip on tight on ancient browser versions. So MS is trying to end this problem.

Call it XP syndrome. Right now Windows 7 is it and mark my words 7 will stay much longer than XP. Expect it still to be significant in 2025.

Complacency never helped anyone.

Why do they even call it update 2 if there are no new features?
They release stability fixes every month, why call this different?

Well, it's probably more beefy than most patch Tuesday updates, even if it has no new features to speak of (that we know of). At least I'm hoping so, not that I've seen any stability issues to speak of in my Windows 2012 R2 install, but I still dig the fixes.

Stoffel said,
Why do they even call it update 2 if there are no new features?
They release stability fixes every month, why call this different?

Maybe they will call it SP 2 as in the good old times...:-)

Stoffel said,
Why do they even call it update 2 if there are no new features?
They release stability fixes every month, why call this different?

There's a BIG difference between an update and a patch, y'know. Or maybe you don't. An update REPLACES the existing OS. A patch simply CHANGES something in the existing OS.

The article states that it's more then likely just some stability fixes, so I was just wondering why all the attention since they do these things every month.
This one might be slightly bigger, but I was assuming that if you are going to call it Update 2 you would have more then just that

Stoffel said,
Why do they even call it update 2 if there are no new features?
They release stability fixes every month, why call this different?

Logically, we should see a new OS version number.

Major_Plonquer said,

There's a BIG difference between an update and a patch, y'know. Or maybe you don't. An update REPLACES the existing OS. A patch simply CHANGES something in the existing OS.


Except this update, and the last, didn't replace the IS *facepalm*

primexx said,
Is Update 2 going to be via Windows Update?

You'll have to download it seperately and copy it onto 800 floppy disks. Reboot you're machine and then reinstall Windows with newly created floppies!

offroadaaron said,
You'll have to download it seperately and copy it onto 800 floppy disks.

or worse, get it via the store app!

adrynalyne said,
Like when you said Microsoft would never bring the start menu back?

Technically, they're not bringing it back. The menu as it existed in XP-7 is dead.

What's upcoming is completely new, and based off the Metro Start Screen.

adrynalyne said,
Like when you said Microsoft would never bring the start menu back?

As if you've never been wrong about something before?

Dot Matrix said,

Technically, they're not bringing it back. The menu as it existed in XP-7 is dead.

What's upcoming is completely new, and based off the Metro Start Screen.


Although I think as well that the new start menu will be a mix and , hopefully, will include the interactive tiles the reality is that nobody here can say now what will be and what will be based upon. Even MS has not finalized it yet....

Dot Matrix said,

Technically, they're not bringing it back.

No, technically they ARE bringing the start menu back, whether or not it is the same start menu in XP/vista/7 or has metro with it is irrelevant, it is still a start menu.

Ian William said,

As if you've never been wrong about something before?

And where did I ever imply or say that? Neowinians sure do have vivid imaginations.

Dot Matrix said,

Technically, they're not bringing it back. The menu as it existed in XP-7 is dead.

What's upcoming is completely new, and based off the Metro Start Screen.

Yes they technically are. Is it not a menu that acts like the start menu did? That it will be improved upon is a given.

adrynalyne said,

And where did I ever imply or say that? Neowinians sure do have vivid imaginations.

I agree. I believe the update is called 8.2 because it will have two Start menus. That should keep everyone happy.

Order_66 said,

No, technically they ARE bringing the start menu back, whether or not it is the same start menu in XP/vista/7 or has metro with it is irrelevant, it is still a start menu.


Jeeeeees. People were arguing that the start menu was gone with people that were glad it was gone. Only now those same people argue what kind if start menu it's going to be. Seriously? If you are going to argue, argue about something more important instead of whining about it.

Dot Matrix said,
Next month? No way. Not when it's as of yet unannounced. Call me skeptical.
I'm confident I could create a clone the new Start menu in Visual Studio within a week.

Dot Matrix said,

Technically, they're not bringing it back. The menu as it existed in XP-7 is dead.

What's upcoming is completely new, and based off the Metro Start Screen.

There is nothing new on this upcoming start menu. it is going to be same classic start menu with addon to apps. So yes it is bringing start menu back despite your repeated denial that it will be never back.

Dot Matrix said,

Technically, they're not bringing it back. The menu as it existed in XP-7 is dead.

You're wrong. Arguing for the sake of arguing huh? I see I see...

i dont care about interactive tiles, i can launch metro apps just by typing in their name in the start search, i would like to see common links on the right, i.e. computer, control pannel, account folder

i dont need some flashy tiles with cooking news to be updating all the time
i kinda miss the time when in order to see news, you had to open a browser

Dot Matrix said,
Next month? No way. Not when it's as of yet unannounced. Call me skeptical.
Update 1 was announced a week ahead.

Studio384 said,
Update 1 was announced a week ahead.

Was gonna say, I don't remember there exactly Microsoft showering the media with information about Update 1 - and then especially after it launched and they told everyone you NEEDED to get Update 1 installed if you wanted to continue to receive updates for your Windows 8.1 / Windows Server 2012 R2 system. Which of course they very quickly backed down from and gave a few months grace.

The August date would make sense, as I believe this is the last month that systems not running Update 1 can still receive other Windows Updates.

Dot Matrix said,

Technically, they're not bringing it back. The menu as it existed in XP-7 is dead.

What's upcoming is completely new, and based off the Metro Start Screen.

Which is why I just paid another $110 to downgrade to Windows 7. No aero or any skuemorphism was the killer for me. All the other glass8 and fake start menu programs just were not right.


As long as MS focuses on putting cell phones onto computers, taking away color, shadows, gradients, and other things consumers will rebel and stick with better older products. I read comments on the leaked Windows 9 screenshots and many will still stick with 7 unless every sign of Metro is gone and this flat minimalism goes away

sinetheo said,

Which is why I just paid another $110 to downgrade to Windows 7. No aero or any skuemorphism was the killer for me. All the other glass8 and fake start menu programs just were not right.


As long as MS focuses on putting cell phones onto computers, taking away color, shadows, gradients, and other things consumers will rebel and stick with better older products. I read comments on the leaked Windows 9 screenshots and many will still stick with 7 unless every sign of Metro is gone and this flat minimalism goes away

Your loss then. Skeuomorphism is dead.

(BTW, there are no leaked Windows 9 screenshots...)

Enron said,

Something a guy made in Photoshop because they had a lot of free time.

Agreed - there's no way that's an actual screenshot. Unless Microsoft have lost their minds.

Dot Matrix said,

Your loss then. Skeuomorphism is dead.

I don't think so, as Google had shown with Android L. Skeuomorphism done right is very, very good, unlike Apple's version.

Yogurth said,

I don't think so, as Google had shown with Android L. Skeuomorphism done right is very, very good, unlike Apple's version.

Show me this Android L.

Yogurth said,

I don't think so, as Google had shown with Android L. Skeuomorphism done right is very, very good, unlike Apple's version.

I don't see Skeuomorphism in these shots at all. Android L looks fairly digital.

Order_66 said,

No, technically they ARE bringing the start menu back, whether or not it is the same start menu in XP/vista/7 or has metro with it is irrelevant, it is still a start menu.

and technically, they are keeping the start screen, but reducing its size. that's why its being referred to as mini start.

vcfan said,

and technically, they are keeping the start screen, but reducing its size. that's why its being referred to as mini start.

LOL still clinging to this desperate narrative from 2013.

Its the Start Menu. You said it would never come back, it is.

Lord Method Man said,

LOL still clinging to this desperate narrative from 2013.

Its the Start Menu. You said it would never come back, it is.

you mean mini start screen. I was right, the old start menu is never coming back. did the old start menu have live tiles?

vcfan said,

you mean mini start screen. I was right, the old start menu is never coming back. did the old start menu have live tiles?


What MS showed, as a work in progress, was not a mini start screen...
What the final product will be is at the moment unknown but MS itself called it a a Start Menu.

Cosmocronos said,

What MS showed, as a work in progress, was not a mini start screen...
What the final product will be is at the moment unknown but MS itself called it a a Start Menu.

its being referred internally at Microsoft as "mini start". you wouldn't call the old start menu mini anything. you would absolutely call something a mini if its something smaller than before(startscreen).

Supposedly it's being called internally "mini-Start," (as it won't be a full-screen Start Menu like in Windows 8), one of my contacts said.

http://www.zdnet.com/what-migh...-menu-look-like-7000024193/

vcfan said,

its being referred internally at Microsoft as "mini start". you wouldn't call the old start menu mini anything. you would absolutely call something a mini if its something smaller than before(startscreen).

http://www.zdnet.com/what-migh...-menu-look-like-7000024193/


Quote from your link:
"Supposedly it's being called internally "mini-Start," (as it won't be a full-screen Start Menu like in Windows 8), one of my contacts said."
Of course we are all entitled to try twisting words....

Cosmocronos said,

Quote from your link:
"Supposedly it's being called internally "mini-Start," (as it won't be a full-screen Start Menu like in Windows 8), one of my contacts said."
Of course we are all entitled to try twisting words....

Its an ancient article he and Dot Matrix were clinging to back when they were hoping beyond hope that it was just going to be a scaled-down Start Screen like Start8's mini-mode is.

Lord Method Man said,

Its an ancient article he and Dot Matrix were clinging to back when they were hoping beyond hope that it was just going to be a scaled-down Start Screen like Start8's mini-mode is.

is June 2014 still ancient? still being called mini start, nothings changed.

Up until recently, Microsoft was hoping to make a new "Mini" Start Menu part of a second update to Windows 8.1. Windows 8.1 Update 2 was -- and still is, last I heard -- slated to arrive in August of this year.

http://www.zdnet.com/no-micros...il-2015-sources-7000030100/

mini refers to the miniaturization of something. a miniaturization of the old start menu doesn't make sense. the miniaturization of the start screen is the only logical conclusion.

Lord Method Man said,

LOL still clinging to this desperate narrative from 2013.

Its the Start Menu. You said it would never come back, it is.

Microsoft has referred to it internally as "Mini Start", as it is a mini Start Screen which can expand and contract depending on the number of Live Tiles you have pinned to it.

But to be frank, the Start Menu from days gone by isn't coming back, and nor should it. It suffered from too many usability nightmares to make it useful in this day and age.

Konstantine said,

What proof do you need? Common sense is common.


Technically, he's right. The start menu is not being ported as the previous era.
It's a mini start screen, with a combination of a brief all apps view and the start screen

Dot Matrix said,

Microsoft has referred to it internally as "Mini Start", as it is a mini Start Screen which can expand and contract depending on the number of Live Tiles you have pinned to it.

But to be frank, the Start Menu from days gone by isn't coming back, and nor should it. It suffered from too many usability nightmares to make it useful in this day and age.

Who cares what microsoft refers to it "internally", it's still a start menu regardless and has been called a start menu by microsoft.

There were no "usability nightmares" from any version of the start menu from XP to 7, that's just all zealot hogwash, there was nothing wrong with the start menu, it worked yesterday and it works today and it will continue to work tomorrow.
Just because a tiny and utterly insignificant number of zealots don't like the start menu doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it for the rest of the normal computing world.

Order_66 said,

Who cares what microsoft refers to it "internally", it's still a start menu regardless and has been called a start menu by microsoft.

There were no "usability nightmares" from any version of the start menu from XP to 7, that's just all zealot hogwash, there was nothing wrong with the start menu, it worked yesterday and it works today and it will continue to work tomorrow.
Just because a tiny and utterly insignificant number of zealots don't like the start menu doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it for the rest of the normal computing world.

There was lots wrong with it. For starters, it didn't scale. It wasn't able to accommodate new Windows 8 technologies (http://www.neowin.net/forum/to...ws-8/page-30#entry595048551), nested flyouts were a mess, folder hierarchies are an abused mess (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnew...ive/2007/08/23/4517137.aspx), etc.

Dot Matrix said,

There was lots wrong with it. For starters, it didn't scale. It wasn't able to accommodate new Windows 8 technologies (http://www.neowin.net/forum/to...ws-8/page-30#entry595048551), nested flyouts were a mess, folder hierarchies are an abused mess (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnew...ive/2007/08/23/4517137.aspx), etc.


Like I said, other than the tiny and insignificant number of zealots complaining about it there was nothing wrong with the start menu at all for the vast majority of consumers.

And for the backward-thinking windows 8 "technologies"(aka metro) a person only has to look as far as the countless start menu replacements to see how easily and effectively those windows 8 "technologies" were handled.

Order_66 said,


Like I said, other than the tiny and insignificant number of zealots complaining about it there was nothing wrong with the start menu at all for the vast majority of consumers.

And for the backward-thinking windows 8 "technologies"(aka metro) a person only has to look as far as the countless start menu replacements to see how easily and effectively those windows 8 "technologies" were handled.

So you would have them continued to drag out busted features, just because people were used to using them? It's a good thing you don't code. Because that's not what users want. It's way past time that code was dumped, and replaced.

Dot Matrix said,

So you would have them continued to drag out busted features, just because people were used to using them? It's a good thing you don't code. Because that's not what users want. It's way past time that code was dumped, and replaced.

I never made any such claim, in fact I couldn't care less if they kept the start menu or not as long as the replacement was as good or better, and we all know how that whole debacle ended up.

And how on earth would YOU know what users want? you were the first on board with that colossal failure known as "metro" and it still hasn't died inside of you yet, you are completely/utterly detached from any and all consumer needs or wants in favor of what YOU want microsoft to do.

mastercoms said,

Technically, he's right. The start menu is not being ported as the previous era.
It's a mini start screen, with a combination of a brief all apps view and the start screen

It's an evolution. Take a species for example. You still call it 'human' regardless the major changes he has been through. There won't be a better example. :p

Order_66 said,

I never made any such claim, in fact I couldn't care less if they kept the start menu or not as long as the replacement was as good or better, and we all know how that whole debacle ended up.

And how on earth would YOU know what users want? you were the first on board with that colossal failure known as "metro" and it still hasn't died inside of you yet, you are completely/utterly detached from any and all consumer needs or wants in favor of what YOU want microsoft to do.

Lol. Metro hasn't failed, and it's far from dead.

Dot Matrix said,

Lol. Metro hasn't failed, and it's far from dead.

if anything, metro is being more heavily integrated into windows. for example, live tiles are also rumored to get integrated into the taskbar.

vcfan said,

if anything, metro is being more heavily integrated into windows. for example, live tiles are also rumored to get integrated into the taskbar.

Which I absolutely CANNOT wait to see!

Dot Matrix said,

Lol. Metro hasn't failed, and it's far from dead.


On the desktop "metro" has completely failed and it took the entire OS with it, that is a well-established and irrefutable fact, like it or not.

vcfan said,

if anything, metro is being more heavily integrated into windows. for example, live tiles are also rumored to get integrated into the taskbar.

As long as it doesn't infer with normal desktop productivity it might actually be a useful integration.
Start menu plus live tiles on the taskbar that can be added or removed according to user preference could be a win/win for microsoft if they implement it correctly.