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

[Panda X]

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.

Assuming they already forked?

[Iian K]

7105 hasn't leaked, and as far as most of us know it isn't even compiled yet.

[NEVER85]

Sooo...basically everybody's assumptions thus far about whether or not 7105 is real, or fake, or RC, or newly forked RTM branch, is all conjecture and hearsay? Nothing definitive yet?

[SoLoR1]

I bet even is MS emplyee would confirm current assumptions abour RC/RTM branches, 50% of people would still yell that its a fake, since he is not posting any pics and if he acualy would post pics, they would whine they are faked since there is no leak. However yes this numbers doesnt change much for "little" people like most of us are. They are just numbers... What represent this numbers is, how close we are to actual RC(escrow) and this might be more interesting for most of us :) Dont worry, we will talk in a few days about same things again ;) I bet when rc-escrow is actualy signed off and "avilable" to download there will be again first 3 pages full of people yelling its "fake".

[kerimcem]

:)

[Kirkburn]

Looks fairly legit to me, nothing leaps out as weird.

Well, except the slightly random HP stuff.

[atleeit]

:)

someone with good photoshop skills :D the only proof you could show is the setup.exe time, date stamp and digital signature.

[atleeit]

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

Yes but they jumped the builds up when they reach a new milestone, just wait and see.

[Snowl]

wait, why does it show the same time as before, shouldn't It have the same or more time left before it expires?

[beatmztr]

Looks fairly legit to me, nothing leaps out as weird.

Well, except the slightly random HP stuff.

It was an HP OEM 7105 ;)

[Livin in a box]

wait, why does it show the same time as before, shouldn't It have the same or more time left before it expires?

Why would it?

[dcoaster]

Couldn't they at least make the "small icons" a litter bigger to fill the tile? Those really are very small...

[atleeit]

It was an HP OEM 7105 ;)

OEM people dont have this yet ;)

[Kirkburn]

Couldn't they at least make the "small icons" a litter bigger to fill the tile? Those really are very small...

It's a user option, to make them small.

wait, why does it show the same time as before, shouldn't It have the same or more time left before it expires?

The expiry date is specified by MS, not relative to the install date.

[beatmztr]

OEM people dont have this yet ;)

I?m sorry I was really only trying to be sarcastic.

[Chris89]

This screenshot is a fake, because:

7105.winmain

It should be:

7105.win7rc1 ... (for example)

[atleeit]

This screenshot is a fake, because:

7105.winmain

It should be:

7105.win7rc1 ... (for example)

that's why i say good photoshop skills, testers don't have this build yet, will in a few days though :D

[xendrome]

:)

When I look at that image... is it just me, or can anyone else tell the font "Build 7105" and "090404" are 100% a tad bit more defined.. or bolder.. especially compared to the "-1235"

That shot.. is 100% fake.

[Kirkburn]

When I look at that image... is it just me, or can anyone else tell the font "Build 7105" and "090404" are 100% a tad bit more defined.. or bolder.. especially compared to the "-1235"

That shot.. is 100% fake.

I don't see any difference. Are you viewing it at proper resolution?

Btw, this news is now a front page post.

[atleeit]

When I look at that image... is it just me, or can anyone else tell the font "Build 7105" and "090404" are 100% a tad bit more defined.. or bolder.. especially compared to the "-1235"

That shot.. is 100% fake.

I lined it up with the real one, this image seems sharper, but definitely pretty good for trying to clone :p

[dcoaster]

It's a user option, to make them small.

I understand that, but that wasn't my statement. One can change between small and large icons but the smaller icons seem a little too small to actually be visible. My question is why can't MS just increase the size of the icons themselves (not the "tiles" which fit perfectly on the smaller taskbar). There is a lot of wasted space in those application "tiles".

I lined it up with the real one, this image seems sharper, but definitely pretty good for trying to clone :p

Have you thought for one minute that the non-default background may have something to do with how it appears to you.... :hmmm:

[Owen W Veteran]

I don't see any difference. Are you viewing it at proper resolution?

Btw, this news is now a front page post.

They posted a fake on the front page? Lol

[Kirkburn]

I understand that, but that wasn't my statement. One can change between small and large icons but the smaller icons seem a little too small to actually be visible. My question is why can't MS just increase the size of the icons themselves (not the "tiles" which fit perfectly on the smaller taskbar). There is a lot of wasted space in those application "tiles".

Ah, fair enough.

Have you thought for one minute that the non-default background may have something to do with how it appears to you.... :hmmm:

Granted, for the watermark. But he may have lined up the about screen.

[Crackler]

Some people are really struggling to actually find reasons to call it fake. :laugh:

[Owen W Veteran]

Some people are really struggling to actually find reasons to call it fake. :laugh:

Since when was the source even a legitimate place to get this kind of information?

djforums? Seriously?