Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 Hits Build 7600 (Possible RTM)
An anonymous reader writes "One Microsoft Way is reporting that Microsoft has significantly incremented the build number of both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2: 'Reports across the Web are pointing to a build 7600 for both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2. This is significant because the bump in the build number would suggest that Microsoft has christened this build as the Release to Manufacturing (RTM) build. The RTM is expected to be given out to Microsoft partners sometime later this month and launched on October 22, 2009, the day of General Availability (GA). The build string is "7600.16384.090710-1945," which indicates that it was compiled just a few days ago: July 10, 2009, at 7:45pm. Microsoft only increments the build number when it reaches a significant goal, and the only one left is the RTM milestone. The last builds that were leaking were all 72xx builds, so such a large bump is suspicious but at the same time it is something Microsoft would do to signify that this is the final build.'"
This does indicate it may be the RTM build, but not because it has a new build number... but because it has a build number ending in 00.
Larry Osterman's post Thinking about Windows Build numbers goes into this in more depth.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
"As Microsoft strives to migrate their core technologies from the desktop onto the Web, so too is their propaganda machine migrating from the established press to the informal social web. Microsoft shills are invading social web sites everywhere - in forums, discussion groups, comments to news items, edits to Wikipedia, manipulation of search engines, comments to blogs - posing as innocent participants to promote their agenda and counter wide spread complaints about their shady marketing practises. Even in the comments section of blogs by Microsoft employees on their own corporate site they employ sock puppets to say the things the author felt inappropriate to say directly. They race to place their shill postings at the top spot in the comments section of news and blogs, or perhaps they are given advance notice enabling them to do this where they are a sponsor. The evidence is here on Slashdot for all to see, without embellishments from me. What I say here is amounts to only a digest of hundreds of postings by others. A careful investigator can see for himself the evolution of discussions on Microsoft related issues, especially those accusing them of their usual hard ball tactics. As one reads from Slashdot's historical record on through to recent times, the evolution of Microsoft's efforts to pervert Slashdot's discussions becomes readily apparent. Microsoft's ambition is to twist internet discussions around a full 180 degrees until these discussions become a platform for propaganda from Microsoft's "Ministry of Truth". A study of the comments of the shills posted here can be cross-correlated with postings on other sites. Their pattern of saturating a discussion with shill postings, and the repeating of mindless memes becomes obvious. Their harassment, ridicule, and suppression of criticisms is designed to intimidated those who would speak out against them. They seek to establish and enforce a discipline of giving Microsoft "fair treatment" and their propaganda the same consideration and respect a real person would deserve. In the process they are destroying Web 2 as we know it. This insidious attack on the infrastructure we rely upon to form our opinions in a complex world has both a direct and an inhibitory effect on free speech as a side effect. We must stop this while it is in its infancy. Once it fully established, it will become much more difficult to root out, and other ruthless corporations, organizations, and even governments will want to emulate the success of Microsoft's campaign. This is the nightmare vision of the end of the social internet as we know it."
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1284651&cid=28502473
I enjoy a pro-Linux article as much as anyone else. Usually I'll give them my vote, but what turns me off on a Linux article is when the author tries to promote Linux by throwing negativity at Microsoft. If we ever want Linux to be an actual threat to Microsoft, it has to stand on its own, and not just be an alternative to Windows. Whining about your position in the market will do nothing to improve it.
Now - that being said. Eventually I found answers for those issues, and I'm pretty pleased with Win 7. There are a couple of quirks, but I'm fairly hopeful that the final build will have them fixed. However... discrediting every pro-Win7 poster as "shill" sounds a bit ridiculous. So with that in mind, where's your evidence that this is the case? You say it's "clearly visible" -- where is your "clear proof" that GP was a shill? Am I a "shill" now because after my initial issues I have had a relatively good experience (and holy shit, a TON better than Vista - even under SP1/SP2). How do you tell the difference between real people who like Win7 and shills?
Amusingly, your post - a copy-paste of someone other AC's unsubstantiated rant actually got modded "interesting", while mine will likely get modded down.
I'll bite, you troll.
Have you actually looked at the PCs in those office buildings full of thousands upon thousands of cubicles. The current hardware refresh is 1GB XP (or 2GB Vista) entry level core 2 duos.
Most big IT shops supporting thousands of users wants standardized PCs that they can swap the monitor out when it dies without having to touch the pc. And if the hard drive goes they want something they can open, plug a new one in, image it, and send it back. ditto the power supply and optical drive. And if the motherboard fails they just replace the PC.
So the imac and mac mini are both out of the running.
The problem isn't that the mac pro isn't good value for what's in the box. The problem is that almost nobody needs what's in that box. And Apple doesn't sell a box with the stuff business needs the way business wants it. They want imac specs in an easily maintained box, separate from the screen.
Apple refuses to make one, and simply puts themselves out of the running in this market.