Recommended Posts

built on September 12, 2005, pretty old i'd say

586648837[/snapback]

I agree. Hardly desirable. Considering that August 30th was the build date for 5219. Not even 2 weeks later.

I like my builds more than a fortnight apart and recent :p

Edited by crimsonhead
I agree.  Hardly desirable.  Considering that August 30th was the build date for 5219.  Not even 2 weeks later.

I like my builds more than a fortnight apart and recent :p

586648851[/snapback]

Umm that's not quite how it works...

5219 was split from the main beta 2 tree weeks before the final 8/30 build that was given out at PDC. Meanwhile the beta 2 branch went forward on its own. The fixes made to 5219 are then reverse integrated into the main branch before the next IDW candidate is broken off from the main branch.

5231 has some significant changes since the PDC build. To think that it has "only 2 weeks" of difference is to misunderstand how software development works. Many of the new features that were merged into the main branch between 5219 and 5231 had been worked on in seperate private branches for a long time.

It does, however, look like some UI stuff has actually been removed from this build versus internal builds. Looks like they don't want even beta testers to see some stuff just yet.

Umm that's not quite how it works...

5219 was split from the main beta 2 tree weeks before the final 8/30 build that was given out at PDC.  Meanwhile the beta 2 branch went forward on its own.  The fixes made to 5219 are then reverse integrated into the main branch before the next IDW candidate is broken off from the main branch.

5231 has some significant changes since the PDC build.  To think that it has "only 2 weeks" of difference is to misunderstand how software development works.  Many of the new features that were merged into the main branch between 5219 and 5231 had been worked on in seperate private branches for a long time.

It does, however, look like some UI stuff has actually been removed from this build versus internal builds.  Looks like they don't want even beta testers to see some stuff just yet.

586649727[/snapback]

I meant that I like compiled builds with all the nuts and bolts about a month apart. I know everything is integrated seperately and worked on. I like it when major changes have occurred between builds. From the screenshots i've seen so far, besides WMP11 being added, I don't see much difference.

Agreed, I'm really looking forward to the audio stack.

WMP11 looks like it will be nice. Although it's clearly very early to final. The new IE7 thumbnail thing looks pretty sweet as well. Thinking I'm probably moving back to IE after moving to Firefox.

Think about if you had seen these screenshots 6 months ago. Probably would have blown your mind. Just thought about when people were talking dates. How is a build for an OS that is less then a month old considered old? ;) If September 12 is old, I don't want to think what 5.1 is. :)

Can't wait until Wednesday or Thursday for this build.

well somone earlier in the thread said nobody cares about the screen shots... so.. just change the word nobody to MOST PEOPLE... and thats the truth... once everyone knows it out and are able to get it.. they start carring... cause when there was just screen shots... i didnt have 118 people connected to me...

if anyone wanted more proof... (no names of web site or users on the page.. so.. ya..should be ok right?)

586650925[/snapback]

You erased the url and the title bar wording, but forgot to remove the taskbar entry...

If I didn't know the site already, I would be thanking you :p

Nick

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.