Windows 7 new milestone 7105 ------6.1.7105.0.winmain.090404-1235

[DerAusgewanderte]

Nonsense is what it is.

Here, let me play:

7080 POSSIBLE RC ESCROW

7080 POSSIBLE RC ESCROW

7080 POSSIBLE RC ESCROW

7081 POSSIBLE RC ESCROW

......

If I'm right, you all owe me ten billion dollars!@#

got ya, 7273 POSSIBLE RC ESCROW is absolutely fake. You revealed yourself, ha.

[The Rev]

got ya, 7273 POSSIBLE RC ESCROW is absolutely fake. You revealed yourself, ha.

*facepalm*......

[FoxieFoxie]

Why not add capital punishment?

[Kirkburn]

Aaand back on topic.

I notice there's a lot of people subtly confirming its existence. However, it would be foolish to take everyone at their word until we actually have something to go on. Even a build number leap doesn't actually mean there are big (or even medium) changes - just that they're into a new development stage.

But we're getting closer to release. This is good.

[koinonia]

LOOL It was really cute =)

[Panda X]

So basically...in a nicer tone :p...a build number skip to indicate reaching the true RC build/trunk/other awkward terminology.

You don't think they would have jumped to 7100? It goes from 7076 on the 2nd of April to 7105 on the 4th. It's illogical to skip 7100, 1, 2, 3, 4(if true then it was the 3rd of April.) Microsoft does skip builds occasionally however it's usually not some number pulled from the air.

Fake until proven.

I found this as the file name on another site: 6.1.7105.0.090404-1235_x86fre_client_en-us_Retail_Ultimate-GB1CULFRER_EN_DVD

I DON'T KNOW if it is fake or not.

Hell anyone can slap the generic DVD name on it. Watch.

6.1.7608.0.090406-1213_x86fre_client_en-us_Retail_Ultimate-GB1CULFRER_EN_DVD.

Now to tell everyone I know that it's real and watch word spread like a mad disease.

[tomwarren Veteran]

They have reserved builds, who says they haven't built 7100? No-one has said that.

[Panda X]

They have reserved builds, who says they haven't built 7100? No-one has said that.

Dates don't match unless they forked winmain and winmain_rc1 back a long time ago.

Which would mean that 7100 would have been compiled March 30th.

[ThePitt]

this leak/releases/etc are getting annoying like were with XP.

I dont know till today why a regular guy would use beta after beta when clearly the changelog (more on windows 7) is not more than a couple of fixes and some retouch of some wasted icon...

Tomorrow would be another beta out there and after tomorrow too. Till RC1. I know, Im not saying something that noone knows but the point is...

[Livin in a box]

Hey everybody...Seems as thought this person who has been posting screens of 7070 and 7075 is back- and this time he's posted 7105. Every time a build is mentioned or leaked or anything, then he already has it. But what gets me is if MS did build 7100, then wouldn't that mean that 7075 wasn't built, it was 7100? Or am I confused again...Anyhow, here's the link.

[DiEMOS]

I highly doubt its real. come on.

[tomwarren Veteran]

Dates don't match unless they forked winmain and winmain_rc1 back a long time ago.

Which would mean that 7100 would have been compiled March 30th.

Maybe this will illustrate it better, from WinMain

As you can see it skipped from 6956 to 7000 for the beta and 7001, 7002 were reserved.

[basix]

Maybe this will illustrate it better, from WinMain

As you can see it skipped from 6956 to 7000 for the beta and 7001, 7002 were reserved.

Not to stir the pot at all but why are 7011 - 7015 folder dated 2008? Not to mention the builds clearly released in 2008 are in a 2009 folder. Not that this isn't achievable if that is a collumn of modified dates and not creation dates. Some transparency please Tom?

[tomwarren Veteran]

Not to stir the pot at all but why are 7011 - 7015 folder dated 2008? Not to mention the builds clearly released in 2008 are in a 2009 folder. Not that this isn't achievable if that is a collumn of modified dates and not creation dates. Some transparency please Tom?

because those builds were compiled in 2008....

[basix]

because those builds were compiled in 2008....

A simple explanation...

[beatmztr]

EDIT-newermind I found out what I was asking for.

[Maccik2]

06.04.2000 2009 we expect that to 8 April 2009 , self-deadlocked exon?ration " signing " Developers group Windows 7 , Assembly status RC.conf(5) , Escrow.com and nevertheless work on Windows 7 is not stopped and now it moved into a new phase, stage Assembly release candidate .

In branch ( assemblies win7rc ) emerged new Assembly релиз-кандидат claiming, currently ( 6.04.09 ) their only two , ?????? 7073 this. 0. 090330 -2032 and ?????? 7077.0.090404-1255 , but nevertheless in the main branch assemblies ( ) WinMain these assemblies yet no!

Draw your attention that 30 March was collected two assemblies 7073 , in the main branch ( ) and WinMain ( win7rc ) релизкандидатной.

ЦЯ!

p.s : we quite seriously consider the possibility of establishing он-лайн betting to determine the status of any assembly products Microsoft , very successful will model business:) siness:)

[SoLoR1]

Ye basickly he is saying that 70xx is RC branch and 71xx is RTM already. So whatever we will get will be probably 70xx RC-escrow and probably public RC with build 7100.

[Maccik2]

Ye basickly he is saying that 70xx is RC branch and 71xx is RTM already. So whatever we will get will be probably 70xx RC-escrow and probably public RC with build 7100.

Thank You SOLOR ....

[Access Denied]

And its sure to fly out the gates any second now that I have 7068 running smoothly, lol.

[UncleSpellbinder]

Hey everybody...Seems as thought this person who has been posting screens of 7070 and 7075 is back- and this time he's posted 7105. Every time a build is mentioned or leaked or anything, then he already has it. But what gets me is if MS did build 7100, then wouldn't that mean that 7075 wasn't built, it was 7100? Or am I confused again...Anyhow, here's the link.

Well, real or not, that screen shot sure seems fake. As someone posted there...

"interesting that the expiration date for 7105 is earlier than 7068."

[FoxieFoxie]

Well, real or not, that screen shot sure seems fake. As someone posted there...

"interesting that the expiration date for 7105 is earlier than 7068."

Official RC expiration is also earlier than non official releases.

[UncleSpellbinder]

Official RC expiration is also earlier than non official releases.

That's not suppose to be official RC though, is it.

[atleeit]

RC Escrow is real 7105.

[SoLoR1]

RC Escrow is real 7105.

no its not. There was 7105.winmain and 7077.win7rc built on SAME DAY. So do math your self....