ZZzzzzzZZZZZ Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 As I said earlier in the post they have improved the speed of IE and WMP, and also some other programs. It looks like microsoft are working even harder to make sure this OS is perfect. All the tinkering under the hood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livin in a box Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I was wandering...How many people are using the 16399 update? I'm still using the 16385 (standard RTM) and installing stuff from WU, so should I put these updates on or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I think I will wait until they are on windows update Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Patri0t Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I will wait too for them to appear on Windows Update. I am hoping they appear soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZZzzzzzZZZZZ Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Yeh Living in a box, you can install the updates. have been testing the updates for around 35 hours now. All seems good and stable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konstanov Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Living in a box All it takes is a tiny pebble and a good swing to take down the glass house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livin in a box Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 YehLiving in a box, you can install the updates. have been testing the updates for around 35 hours now. All seems good and stable It's Livin, not Living. ?? I've been hearing that these updates actually downgrade with Windows6.1-KB675605-v2 , is this true? I'll be installing the x86 versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orien Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Yeah, I can wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneKnee Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 It's Livin, not Living. ??I've been hearing that these updates actually downgrade with Windows6.1-KB675605-v2 , is this true? I'll be installing the x86 versions. Livin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatolian Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I will wait until it appears on WU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoDEAN Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 I will wait too for them to appear on Windows Update. I am hoping they appear soon. You'll be waiting til October 22, 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livin in a box Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 You'll be waiting til October 22, 2009. Check your PM's... Well, has anyone installed Windows6.1-KB675605-v2-x86, and does it downgrade to 16397 sub build, not 19399 like the others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Freeman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Yeah, well, skipped that 605 update. Both versions. As im pretty much sure, thers more to come. Other updates seem to be working fine though i dont see any changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoDEAN Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 Check your PM's...Well, has anyone installed Windows6.1-KB675605-v2-x86, and does it downgrade to 16397 sub build, not 19399 like the others? Check google if you want a link to the updates. Mods on here seem to have a serious problem with people giving links to "Microsoft" updates if they are not yet up on WU yet. Their loss I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwjw1 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I found this information about these updates (Some files will change with version 7600.16385 to 7600.16400, 7600.16401) Windows6.1-KB123334-x86.msu Microsoft-Windows-IEInstal assembly that updates IEInstal.exe in %ProgramFiles%\Internet Explorer\ folder. Windows6.1-KB123456-x86.msu Microsoft-Windows-notepad revision distribution that updates Notepad.exe. Windows6.1-KB674103-x86.msu A update that upgrades Win32k, User32, TCP/IP binaries (tcpip.sys), SxS, NDIS (ndis.sys), GDI32 and common controls component. Windows6.1-KB675605-v2-x86.msu (will change/downgrade version to 16397) A GDR update that upgrade Windows 7 OS kernel, HAL (hardware abstraction layer, boot environment core BootManagerPCAT components. This update package is responsible for changing the BuildLabEx string. Windows6.1-KB675605-x86.msu A GDR update that upgrades Windows 7 OS Kernel, HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer), BootEnvironment Core BootManagerPCAT components. This update package is responsible for changing the BuildLabEx string. Windows6.1-KB675606-x86.msu Drivers Package Windows6.1-KB972636-x86.msu IE compatibility update with new version. Windows6.1-KB973525-x86.msu ActiveX Kilibits Windows6.1-KB973751-x86.msu Update to Windows 7 image based Setup media and Setup navigation Wizard framework. Windows6.1-KB973874-x86.msu Internet Explorer Windows6.1-KB974039-v2-x86.msu Update to Windows search engine. Windows6.1-KB974138-x86.msu Update to Windows GUI and font embedding component. Windows6.1-KB974176-x86.msu Core and WinPE Windows6.1-KB974179-x86.msu Update for Windows Explorer Windows6.1-KB974204-v2-x86.msu Localization Windows6.1-KB974204-x86.msu Localization Windows6.1-KB974324-x86.msu Windows Media Center Windows6.1-KB974327-x86.msu Core Windows6.1-KB974332-x86.msu Localization Windows6.1-KB974638-x86.msu Core Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra.Xtreme Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Check your PM's...Well, has anyone installed Windows6.1-KB675605-v2-x86, and does it downgrade to 16397 sub build, not 19399 like the others? Yep, it downgraded the build number on my end. Oh well, it's just a number. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code.kliu.org Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 KB123456 is definitely not a real update (for starters, just look at the KB number!), and somebody on another forum even went as far as examining the updated EXE and finding that aside from things like the version number and digital signature, it was bit-for-bit identical with the original (after all, what can possible break in Notepad that would require a hotfix?). This is probably just a test update, like the many test updates that Microsoft released during the Beta and RC to verify that updating mechanism is working as expected. A number of the other updates (namely, the ones whose KB numbers are abnormally low) are probably test updates as well, and they also all carry the same build ID (16399 for GDR) as the Notepad update. So as people have said before and as I am now reiterating, some of these updates are not real updates and are test updates, and people should not go about blindly installing every one of them! If you really must go installing them to satisfy an itch, at least avoid the ones that have an abnormal KB number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeusProto Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 As long as they are digitally signed with a valid certificate from Microsoft, they are legitimate. However, they may indeed be test updates as some have noted. I will wait just to be safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salamanca Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) KB123456 is definitely not a real update (for starters, just look at the KB number!), and somebody on another forum even went as far as examining the updated EXE and finding that aside from things like the version number and digital signature, it was bit-for-bit identical with the original (after all, what can possible break in Notepad that would require a hotfix?). This is probably just a test update, like the many test updates that Microsoft released during the Beta and RC to verify that updating mechanism is working as expected.A number of the other updates (namely, the ones whose KB numbers are abnormally low) are probably test updates as well, and they also all carry the same build ID (16399 for GDR) as the Notepad update. So as people have said before and as I am now reiterating, some of these updates are not real updates and are test updates, and people should not go about blindly installing every one of them! If you really must go installing them to satisfy an itch, at least avoid the ones that have an abnormal KB number. Some of them have improved Windows desktop graphics responsiveness and WEI score by 0.1 in corresponding dept., so they are indeed real! Notepad.exe is not the same. It has changed to .16399. Finally the list of updates above is not new. Has been around for more than 3 weeks now. Edited August 21, 2009 by salamanca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code.kliu.org Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 As long as they are digitally signed with a valid certificate from Microsoft, they are legitimate. That is correct. They do come from Microsoft. So they are "legitimate" in that sense. To clarify, I was saying that they are not "legitimate" in the sense that they are not "real" updates. Some of them have improved Windows desktop graphics responsiveness and WEI score by 0.1 in corresponding dept., so they are indeed real! I didn't say that all of them are test updates. The ones with normal KB numbers may (or may not) turn out to be real updates. But some (KB123456 being the most blatant example) definitely are not real updates. Notepad.exe is not the same. It has changed to .16399. So all that matters to you is an inconsequential version number? Please re-read my post, namely the part that reads "aside from things like the version number and digital signature". Yes, the version number was changed, and the internal build timestamp was changed. But who cares about that? If you disassemble the executable code in the EXE and compare it, you will find that absolutely nothing has changed. Microsoft had publicly stated during the Beta and RC that this is what their test updates are: the exact same files, no changes, except for a new version number, to test the update functionality, not to deliver any actual changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salamanca Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 That is correct. They do come from Microsoft. So they are "legitimate" in that sense. To clarify, I was saying that they are not "legitimate" in the sense that they are not "real" updates.I didn't say that all of them are test updates. The ones with normal KB numbers may (or may not) turn out to be real updates. But some (KB123456 being the most blatant example) definitely are not real updates. So all that matters to you is an inconsequential version number? Please re-read my post, namely the part that reads "aside from things like the version number and digital signature". Yes, the version number was changed, and the internal build timestamp was changed. But who cares about that? If you disassemble the executable code in the EXE and compare it, you will find that absolutely nothing has changed. Microsoft had publicly stated during the Beta and RC that this is what their test updates are: the exact same files, no changes, except for a new version number, to test the update functionality, not to deliver any actual changes. Sorry the two versions/binaries of notepad are different, unlike official test updates that always had exactly the same files inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
code.kliu.org Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Sorry the two versions/binaries of notepad are different, unlike official test updates that always had exactly the same files inside. No they're not different. Have you actually verified what you are saying? Because I have. After you made that claim that they are different, I decided to verify this myself. It's quite simple to do, actually. Disassemble the Notepad from the 16399 Notepad. Then disassemble the Notepad from the 16385 RTM. And now tell me where they differ. You can't? Well, that's because they are the same! Furthermore, if you do a binary diff of the two, you will notice that all the differences are in areas that are expected to be different (e.g., the link timestamp in the PE header, the version number, the digital signature, etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salamanca Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 No they're not different. Have you actually verified what you are saying? Because I have. After you made that claim that they are different, I decided to verify this myself. It's quite simple to do, actually. Disassemble the Notepad from the 16399 Notepad. Then disassemble the Notepad from the 16385 RTM. And now tell me where they differ. You can't? Well, that's because they are the same! Furthermore, if you do a binary diff of the two, you will notice that all the differences are in areas that are expected to be different (e.g., the link timestamp in the PE header, the version number, the digital signature, etc.) They are different! Plus Notepad.exe is NOT digitally signed! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livin in a box Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 You're saying that test updates were released on the beta and RC, code.kliu. However, we are not on those anymore. These just change the version number, but that's no reason to not install them because nothing else has changed. There's no point arguing over whether an update does anything or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicAndre1981 Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 the KB1xxxxx and KB6xxxxx are test updates! the other ones are real and will be released later (ActiveX Kill Bit security update, IE8 comp. update) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts