Microsoft OS's Checklist

[madscientist]

WindowsNT 3.0 Retail

Now this I would like to see, but it would be doubtful
I also think that there were more MS-DOS versions that had fat 32 compatibility and some other features. They were released only for banks and for the military and the version numbers were a between 6.23 and 6.25.

As an I.T. person, I was a bit confused to hear about MSDOS as a stand alone beyond 6.22. I am aware that you can strip down Windows 95 and even Windows 98 into their DOS only remainder, but that's not what I wanted.

I had also spoken with a few people in the military, who had talked about a "Military Edition" of either NT 4 or 2000 that used multi-password logins - ie: enter NAME, password 1, password 2. To this day, I have found nothing to proove any truth to this. Anyone with proof, please show me. The multiple password scenario sounds great as well as the concept of a military specific version, regardless of the specific features included.

[Le Master]

Judging from the screenshots existing of "2309", I'd say this was certainly a fake. The compile date, for instance, is hilarious. AFAIK, there were no known 23xx builds at all.

Do you have any links to the screenshots? I'd like to see them because I can sware I installed 2309 at one point.

[Battler]

- madscientist: The above-posted check-list seems to have been written by someone, who doesn't know, that 4.00.950 B, and 4.00.1111, are in fact the same versions of Windows (the same goes for 4.00.950 C, and 4.00.121x).

[empireum]

Judging from the screenshots existing of "2309", I'd say this was certainly a fake. The compile date, for instance, is hilarious. AFAIK, there were no known 23xx builds at all.

Do you have any links to the screenshots? I'd like to see them because I can sware I installed 2309 at one point.

Yeah, look:
http://air101.betablogs.net/images/XP/2309/Desktop.jpg
http://air101.betablogs.net/images/XP/2 ... rtmenu.jpg
Look at the compile date. This is obviously faked. 10/47/2000 at 12.79??? What's that?

[Le Master]

Judging from the screenshots existing of "2309", I'd say this was certainly a fake. The compile date, for instance, is hilarious. AFAIK, there were no known 23xx builds at all.

Do you have any links to the screenshots? I'd like to see them because I can sware I installed 2309 at one point.

Yeah, look:
http://air101.betablogs.net/images/XP/2309/Desktop.jpg
http://air101.betablogs.net/images/XP/2 ... rtmenu.jpg
Look at the compile date. This is obviously faked. 10/47/2000 at 12.79??? What's that?

Thanks for the links, I didn't know about that website. I definitely remember that "My Word Book," it was like a dictionary/thesauraus type tool. It was kind of worthless so that's probably why we didn't see it in the ensuing builds.

[Aztech]

Judging from the screenshots existing of "2309", I'd say this was certainly a fake. The compile date, for instance, is hilarious. AFAIK, there were no known 23xx builds at all.

Do you have any links to the screenshots? I'd like to see them because I can sware I installed 2309 at one point.

Yeah, look:
http://air101.betablogs.net/images/XP/2309/Desktop.jpg
http://air101.betablogs.net/images/XP/2 ... rtmenu.jpg
Look at the compile date. This is obviously faked. 10/47/2000 at 12.79??? What's that?

Even stranger, the quote in the winver that says prebeta2 is something
I've yet to see in any MS beta.

[empireum]

Just another proof that this build has been faked...

[Le Master]

Very curious. I'll have to dig around through my myriad hard drives, I know I have this build somewhere. This is driving me bonkers.

[pr0gram the pr0grammer]

As an I.T. person, I was a bit confused to hear about MSDOS as a stand alone beyond 6.22. I am aware that you can strip down Windows 95 and even Windows 98 into their DOS only remainder, but that's not what I wanted.

I had also spoken with a few people in the military, who had talked about a "Military Edition" of either NT 4 or 2000 that used multi-password logins - ie: enter NAME, password 1, password 2. To this day, I have found nothing to proove any truth to this. Anyone with proof, please show me. The multiple password scenario sounds great as well as the concept of a military specific version, regardless of the specific features included.

Windows NT/2K/etc does let you write your own DLL file that replaces the Windows Logon screen with something else, ie for biometric security or special smart card systems ... perhaps the military have copies of NT with a custom-written logon system?

[Xammer]

This topic should be closed because of the "Newest Microsoft OS Checklist" project by tpemail.

[Andy]

Locked.

[Arths]

This is an amazing check-list!