Quantcast
Channel: BetaArchive
Viewing all 61669 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 1:15 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Download Requests/Offers
By User: Win7

Ok, you have to understand that I have to got to work and sleep, unlike you kids here. With the very limited free time I've got, here is a screenshot of the properties of setup.exe.

As I said, I don't current have any time to install XP, upgrade and take screenshots; and upload this build. So, feel free to discuss it and I will catch up with you guys later.

Woah, woah, cool down, @Bobby! None of us meant to criticise you or blame anything on you. That one screenshot is enough for us to ascertain that what you got is the actual build, so feel free to reply anytime you are willing to.

We were only afraid you would vanish in thin air, as simple as that.

We're very, very happy you joined our community.

Win7
↧
Search

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 1:45 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Download Requests/Offers
By User: ComputerHunter

Very well, could you please upload it? Also, although every Microsoft CD has do not copy or lend warning on it and technically it is illegal to upload it then give it out to the public, however Microsoft won't care about it as you can see the amount of Microsoft betas (Even Windows 10) on the FTP, so you won't get in trouble.

Who is George Wolfowitz? The guy with Chicago Build 34?
↧
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 3:45 am
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 4:49 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Download Requests/Offers
By User: yourepicfailure

>bobby

Since it looks to me like you did a simple CD dump of the files, a very easy way to produce a bootable iso is just delete the contents of the XP iso with an iso editor like MagicISO or PowerISO and drop the longhorn files in their place. Or make a new image using the bootcode from the Xp iso. Either way that would save you time of not having to jump through hoops to install. Wouldn't upload that iso though.

While there are many kids on this forum, there are many adults. In other countries. With different timezones.
↧

Re: [BA FTP archive] Errata: Wrong version numbers, misnamin

February 4, 2019, 5:03 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Servers Discussion
By User: Overdoze

We've recently had a discussion on RoL about the OSR2.1 betas, which are classified on the FTP under "Microsoft Windows 95C (''Detroit'')". The problem here is that Detroit was the codename for the USB Supplement to OSR2, which was also released as a OSR2+USB update combo known as OSR2.1. And that release was still called "950 B" in system properties. The betas indeed set it to C, but this changed between USBSUPP builds 1156 and 1163 (I'll upload the latter soon), where it was reverted to B.

I know this particular era of Windows development is very confusing due to all the interconnected projects going on (Nashville, Memphis, OSRs…), but I think it's pretty clear that build 1107, 1113, 1132 and 1154 are from the OSR2.1/USB Supplement/Detroit branch, although their origin and relation to Memphis and OSR2 remains complicated. If you compare them to builds of OSR2, you'll see that most files you'll find only in these four builds are the same files installed by USBSUPP.EXE, ie. USB and WDM-related files.

The eventual C release ended up being OSR 2.5 in late 1997, which was an afterthought that basically used the OSR2.1 base and added some updated apps to it, most notably IE4. INF files from OSR2.5 reveal there was a beta in October 1997 and an RC in November. We have an incomplete but working beta which I'll also upload soon since it wasn't added years ago for some reason. The codename of OSR2.5 is unknown, if it even had any at all.

tl;dr I would suggest the rename of "Microsoft Windows 95C (''Detroit'')" to "Microsoft Windows 95 OSR2.1 (''Detroit'')" and "Microsoft Windows 95B (''Chicago'')" to "Microsoft Windows 95 OSR2 (''Chicago'')", with the "Microsoft Windows 95 OSR2.5" folder added once its beta is uploaded.
↧
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 5:31 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Download Requests/Offers
By User: DiskingRound

I think it's best for him to upload the folder dump. Windows 3.0 build 55 was also releaked this way. It surely may appear that the rumors of 3663 being leaked a long time ago are actually true.
↧

Re: New informations (and photos) on Windows 1.00 Pre-DR5 !

February 4, 2019, 7:41 am
$
0
0
In Forum: DOS to Windows 3.xx
By User: johnlemon647

I am reconstructing all the icons from 1983 Comdex Build. I still need to do 2 more Art, Calendar, Notepad and Clipboard. After I get all the icons in 64x64 modern ico format, I will convert them to the DR5 format and build sample apps using them on DR5.

I think it might be a bit hard to reconstruct Interface Manager with actual binaries because I am sure the NE format is completely different and those DOS apps are made for Interface Manager (not the same as the ones from MS Mouse).

It will more demo that than actual build end til real Interface Manager surface one day.
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 8:14 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Download Requests/Offers
By User: WindowsNeptune

Um, just asking, according to picture on BetaWiki, the buildtag of 3663 is 6.0.3663.Lab06_N.020728-1728, and the date on the screenshot posted by OP is 020728-10:00PM, so..... I want to ask should all the files from a ISO have the same date and time value with buildtag？
↧
Search

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 8:16 am
↧
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 8:21 am
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 8:26 am
↧

Re: [Offer] Windows Longhorn Build 3663

February 4, 2019, 8:31 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Download Requests/Offers
By User: WILSON2bGg

>bobby

Since it looks to me like you did a simple CD dump of the files, a very easy way to produce a bootable iso is just delete the contents of the XP iso with an iso editor like MagicISO or PowerISO and drop the longhorn files in their place. Or make a new image using the bootcode from the Xp iso. Either way that would save you time of not having to jump through hoops to install. Wouldn't upload that iso though.

While there are many kids on this forum, there are many adults. In other countries. With different timezones.

I think it would be best if he kept it in folder dump form. If he uploads, the people that will download can make a .ISO image. It would also be easier for people on our end to make their own .ISO.

I do agree, there are a lot of kids (one myself) on here. What separates members is how mature they can be.
↧

Re: Unreal 1 Development History

February 4, 2019, 8:49 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Games
By User: GamesHarder

Big? news.

Remember that trailer I've found which looked like it's the better version of unreal.rm?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqgEjee41FI

I contacted the uploader and asked him where did the find the video.
He said that it was on an old demo CD of videogames but he doesn't have it anymore
But! he said that the cd belongs to a series called "The Games Machine" which is Italian.
(I will do a further research on that)

Moreover, he sent me the trailer in the original .MOV format and it doesn't have that stabilization problem and it seems like he didn't cut off any parts, it's still 2 min.

I've uploaded in my MEGA folder, and it's in the Videos subfolder called UNR.MOV
https://mega.nz/#F!qtgBmABa!vdYboKgORFX43DrijuBVQQ
↧
↧

Re: Unreal 1 Development History

February 4, 2019, 8:50 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Games
By User: GamesHarder

Without that stabilization problem, a better view on this unknown map.

https://www.betaarchive.com/imageupload/2019-02/1549299011.th.41019.PNG
↧

Re: Chicago build 58s Setup31: research topic

February 4, 2019, 9:13 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Windows 9x, ME
By User: DVINTHEHOUSEMAN

I actually got it installed using The Chicago 58s disk and the Windows 3.1 floppies, and the last 3 buttons rendered. Now... That "Restart Chicago" button... could possibly reference builds pre-34,33,M3.1, whatever you want to call it.
P.S. I used the 58s disk mostly. It also references to Windows 3.1 wherever I look, even when I run Winver in DOS 6.22
↧
Search

Re: Windows Beta 1.02.02

February 4, 2019, 9:19 am
↧

Re: Windows XP Starter Edition Wallpapers

February 4, 2019, 10:04 am
↧
↧

Re: Social: New member introductions

January 31, 2019, 11:39 pm
$
0
0
In Forum: General Discussion
By User: gaiaweylyn

Ah yes, might as well say hello here. I'm primarily into vintage computing from the mid 80's to late 90s, even though my experience with computers didn't start until afterwards. I have a growing collection of real hardware from that period, but also enjoy messing with software on virtualized and/or emulated systems.

I am also rather interested in obsolete data storage formats, and get particularly excited whenever promotional materials from Iomega appear for sale.
↧

Re: [BA FTP archive] Errata: Wrong version numbers, misnamin

February 1, 2019, 12:43 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Servers Discussion
By User: Edness

/(Beta) Games/Microsoft Xbox360/Lost Planet (debug) should be Lost Planet 2 (2009-12-10) (beta) [Debug]

These are duplicate folders that are empty inside and should be gotten rid of:
/(Beta) Games/Microsoft Xbox360/Monday Night Combat (2011-04-06) (beta)
/(Beta) Games/Microsoft Xbox360/Monday Night Combat (2011-05-05) (beta)

/(Beta) Games/Microsoft Xbox360/Empire (2008-12-01) (unreleased) and /(Beta) Games/Microsoft Xbox360/Shadow Complex (2008-12-01) (beta) are duplicates.
First one should go, Empire was just the placeholder name.

/(Beta) Games/Sony Playstation 2/Gran Turismo 4 Online (2006-05-02) (beta demo) [PAPX-90523] & /(Beta) Games/Sony Playstation 2/Gran Turismo 4 Online (2006-06-06) (beta demo) [SCUS-97436]
/(Beta) Games/Sony Playstation 2/Gran Turismo 4 Online (beta demo) (2006-05-02) [PAPX-90523] & /(Beta) Games/Sony Playstation 2/Gran Turismo 4 Online (beta demo) (2006-06-06) [SCUS-97436]
Whoops, duplicates of those 2, just with slightly altered names

For naming consistency with other Ratchet & Clank builds,
/(Beta) Games/Sony Playstation 2/Ratchet & Clank - Up Your Arsenal (2004-06-20) (beta) [SCUS-97413] should be Ratchet & Clank 3

/(Beta) Games/Sony Playstation 2/SOCOM (beta) [SCES-50928] should be SOCOM - U.S. Navy Seals (2003-02-28) (beta) [SCES-50928]
↧

Can't view the ftp server

February 1, 2019, 1:41 am
$
0
0
In Forum: Site Feedback and Support
By User: Naomi2319

I have attempted to connect to the server with filezilla but I can't view any of the files. Just an empty folder called /. Have I done something wrong? Because I followed the tutorial step by step.
↧
Viewing all 61669 articles
Browse latest View live
Search
<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>