Recommended Posts

Sooooo, the screenshots are just based on someone who has an xp with patched uxtheme or Jemaho's Vistaskin for windowblinds without AlphaBlending...

Am i right?

-- Update: those torrents are just fake. Version number of wmplayer.exe is 10.00.00.3802 (different from screenshots) and language is Danish (wtf?)... Don't get how they did that...

ever heard of uxtheme hacking?

I wouldn't expect many people to be using the non-glass theme from Vista under XP.

Nevertheless, why not post a complete desktop shot with winver? Anyone can post a screenie of just Wmp11 now from Vista with the XP SP2 Wmp11 skin and reshack the version number if they wanted to.

Torrents are fake, probably screenshots too...

Torrents are just Danish WMP10 with reshacked version number..., the tmp file in the torrent has version number 1 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 3 8 0 2, so it's just all fake fake fake i guess...

Edited by Ambroos

Torrents are fake, probably screenshots too...

Torrents are just version reshacked, the tmp file in the torrent has version number 1 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 3 8 0 2, so it's just all fake fake fake i guess...

I can guarantee to you that the screenshots for the real Wmp11 build (4779) under XP with the Royale theme are not faked, seeing as they came from the network I'm from, WinBeta.org and knowing who showed the pics. Nevertheless, that build will not get leaked for many reasons, that's certain.

I can guarantee to you that the screenshots for the real Wmp11 build (4779) under XP with the Royale theme are not faked, seeing as they came from the network I'm from, WinBeta.org and knowing who showed the pics. Nevertheless, that build will not get leaked for many reasons, that's certain.

good. so now u know.

I can guarantee to you that the screenshots for the real Wmp11 build (4779) under XP with the Royale theme are not faked, seeing as they came from the network I'm from, WinBeta.org and knowing who showed the pics. Nevertheless, that build will not get leaked for many reasons, that's certain.

Well the torrent is faked...

Well the torrent is faked...

The torrent has nothing to do with the screenshots. 4779 will not get released so there's no point looking for any torrents for that build.

good. so now u know.

Are we going to get see your whole desktop with winver or should we just judge whether your pic is real or fake based on just Wmp11 being in the screenshot with a Vista non-glass theme?

Are we going to get see your whole desktop with winver or should we just judge whether your pic is real or fake based on just Wmp11 being in the screenshot with a Vista non-glass theme?

get masterhack to print u tons of screenshots for ur viewing pleasure if thats what u want. enough tips.

get masterhack to print u tons of screenshots for ur viewing pleasure if thats what u want. enough tips.

Thanks for proving to us that your screenshots are nothing more than Wmp11 under Vista.

Btw, 6140 is the Vista 5342 Wmp11 build with the exact same version etc. in the About window that your screenshot has,

http://www.win-vista.net/albums/Vista5342/wmp_2_ver.png , so yes I do think that your screenshot is not XP at all, but just 5342 with the compatibility mode.

Edited by Arneh

Thanks for proving to us that your screenshots are nothing more than Wmp11 under Vista.

wmp11 build 6161 is on vista 5365. it has a blue progress bar and a different shuffle/repeat icon. wmp11 build 4779 and 6140 on xp has the green progress bar with a new shuffle/repeat icon. enabling visualization on 6140 will screw up ur machine display. hang > reboot.

wmp11 build 6161 is on vista 5365. it has a blue progress bar and a different shuffle/repeat icon. wmp11 build 4779 and 6140 on xp has the green progress bar with a new shuffle/repeat icon. enabling visualization on 6140 will screw up ur machine display. hang > reboot.

I would suggest you look again at my previous post, I edited it after finding the right screenshot. Your 6140 is nothing more than just Vista 5342 Wmp11 with compatibility mode. http://www.win-vista.net/albums/Vista5342/wmp_2_ver.png shows the 5342 Wmp11 build which does indeed have the Green rather than blue.

Anyone know if it supports ipods? Or is MS boycotting it still?

If not, I think its daft not supporting it. If they did I would use it over Itunes any day of the week.

Do you actually think apple would allow any other program except iTunes have official support for ipod?

So WMP11 with XP SP2 compatibility on vista just shows us something that looks like WMP11 on XP... Nice...

What's the difference between build 4779 and 6140 on xp?

6140 is not on XP. My previous post shows the screenshot of 6140 is nothing more than just Vista 5342 Wmp11 with compatibility mode for XP. 4779 is the only real Wmp11 XP build so far.

Do you actually think apple would allow any other program except iTunes have official support for ipod?

Exactly. If anything did support it they'd probably issue a firmware update to disable it. Apple + community = joke.

Anyone know if it supports ipods? Or is MS boycotting it still?

If not, I think its daft not supporting it. If they did I would use it over Itunes any day of the week.

Same here. I just hope someone releases a plugin for WMP 11 just like they did for Winamp.

I would suggest you look again at my previous post, I edited it after finding the right screenshot. Your 6140 is nothing more than just Vista 5342 Wmp11 with compatibility mode. http://www.win-vista.net/albums/Vista5342/wmp_2_ver.png shows the 5342 Wmp11 build which does indeed have the Green rather than blue.

u just wont give up dont u? that is because 4779 and 6140 is the older build from 6161. so what will 6789 or 7999.9 be? red? just sit back and pray u get ur hands on the leak.

u just wont give up dont u? so what will 6789 or 7999.9 be? red? just sit back and pray u get ur hands on the leak.

I really do hate it when people claim something but can't stand up to their claim, especially when the facts are right in front of them that prove them wrong. Skoogie, without any more proof from you, for example a build date, a full screenshot with winver, your screenshots are nothing more than Wmp11 under 5342. If you really do want, I can even install 5342 and take a screenshot that looks exactly the same as yours with the same build number and UI.

Obviously 6140 and 4779 are older than 6161. The 6140 screenshot however is from Vista 5342. The 4779 screenshot is from XP. Btw, 4779 was built on the 13th of March.

WMP11 is colorable, you can choose a color but it isn't affecting the buttons as in WMP10, and not (yet) affecting slider colors, and it also isn't changing the taskbar mode yet...

Screenshot: WMP 11 in Vista (5365) XP SP2 compatibility colored red (attachment)

post-151800-1146422883_thumb.jpg

Edited by Ambroos

Why make it so complicated:

WMP11 quick build overview:

4779 (XP) ---green sliders (13th march)

6140 (Vista 5345) ---green sliders

6161 (Vista 5365) --- blue sliders

assuming that all screenshots are real it just means that microsoft decided to make the sliders blue, not green, and that the XP build was made BEFORE they made that decision.

I can guarantee to you that the screenshots for the real Wmp11 build (4779) under XP with the Royale theme are not faked, seeing as they came from the network I'm from, WinBeta.org and knowing who showed the pics. Nevertheless, that build will not get leaked for many reasons, that's certain.

Nice bragging. :rolleyes:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!