Windows 7 Build 7600 RTM Screenshots

Ars Technica have posted the first screenshot of Windows 7 Build 7600, which has all but been confirmed as the RTM build.

I will update this post as soon as I have some more (please email to everton@everything-microsoft.com if you are currently installing/have installed).

Thanks to Itay in Israel for the nice screenshot with W7News in the background ;-)

More Galleries: All GalleriesWindows 7 GalleriesWindows 8 Galleries

Subscribe & Connect

Share This Post: 

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter for updates:

, , , , ,

22 Responses to Windows 7 Build 7600 RTM Screenshots

  1. Stephen July 13, 2009 at 3:31 pm #

    All but confirmed when Microsoft absolutely denies it is the RTM? Again, an interesting interpretation of confirmed. As I pointed out someplace else today, apparently some blog (or other “source”) has suggested that Sarah Palin murdered Michael Jackson. Is that true too simply because someone online said so? Reliable sources are named sources from within Microsoft, not Wzor, Ars Technica, Australian bloggers, or other rumor mills. It is what it is – a rumored RTM build that the developer has stated is not the RTM….

    Stephen

    • windows 7 Fan July 13, 2009 at 6:07 pm #

      good point but still, if it isn’t legit it is at least a branch of the rtm.

      • colin July 13, 2009 at 10:39 pm #

        but still isn’t final.

      • Anonymous December 20, 2009 at 9:44 am #

        it cannot be final cos needs may come out again

        • Dan December 20, 2009 at 9:11 pm #

          Geez some people are so late in news! Windows 7 came out in stores on October 22!

          You can even buy it on Microsoft.com!

          lmao

    • Jon July 14, 2009 at 5:10 am #

      @Stephen: Well, “all but confirmed” indeed means “Not confirmed at all”… ;-)

      • kaczula July 14, 2009 at 6:05 am #

        owned ;)

  2. allomobile July 13, 2009 at 8:25 pm #

    It better not be final: I hope Windows Version is set to 7. My thought is: maybe Microsoft was using the number 6.1 for all testing, and will only increment the final release to Version 7. I undertand that version number is completely different from release name, but it would make so much sense to keep them the same for this release.

    • RobSometimes July 13, 2009 at 9:13 pm #

      They kept it 6.1 for compatiblity, or so I read.

    • Vigilante July 14, 2009 at 3:09 am #

      As RobSometimes suggested, Microsoft will be keeping the major version at 6 for compatibility reasons. A lot of software checks the version of windows by asking for the OS major version, ignoring (for the most part) point versions.

      That’s why almost all windows 2000 (NT 5.0) software worked properly under xp (NT 5.1). Same principle, but since 99.99% of people who are actually using windows will really not need to know the exact version beyond its name, it isn’t particularly important. Like everything though, there’s never a change that everyone is happy with. In this case it’s far too late for Microsoft to change the major version number, that’s what the pre-beta and betas were for.

      Can I ask why you are so unhappy with the change though, beyond not liking the fact that 6.1 = 7 of course.

      • allomobile July 14, 2009 at 3:20 pm #

        No other reason. Just that 6.1 != 7, and that is a major reason. If they called it Windows Vienna or any other real name, it would be okay. It makes no future-thinking sense to give it a number for the name, different from what it actually is. Suppose this is the last Windows product MS makes: there would be no question that anyone referring to 7 is referring to this. But should they make a “Windows 8″ (even by any other name) that is actually Windows Version 7, trying to find compatibility information would be hell.

        I can only imagine skipping version number 7, to NT 8 for the next major Windows release, just for the sake of clarity.

        • Vigilante July 14, 2009 at 4:00 pm #

          Assuming Microsoft follows the same conventions as in the past, wherein a major overhaul that is likely to cause incompatibilities gets a new major version number, skipping version 7 altogether (in terms of NT7) is a good idea. Naming it NT7 is no different from naming it NT8 from a program compatibility perspective, it;s still not version 6 and is therefore not likely to be compatible. If, however, the next version of windows follows the same path as windows 7, it may very well be named Windows 8 with NT kernel version 6.2… or 6.5… etc, depending how radical the changes to the kernel have been. It’s effectively a cosmetic change to help program installers know whether there SHOULD be compatibility or not.

          Think of it this way: the Linux kernel is almost always a different version from the OS. Microsoft has previously, in the past, used the used the same version of kernel and major OS – NT 3.0 for example. Then, they began naming their OS releases – 2000, XP, Vista – which didn’t change much since only applications really require the nt kernel version. Admittedly the fact that windows 7 with kernel 6.1 is a little annoying, it’s no different from windows 2000 (still a number, admittedly based on a year) having kernel version 5.

          This is the best choice Microsoft could have made – Confusing for the very low percentage of people who need to understand the OS version number but can’t tell the difference between the OS name and kernel version, most people who need to know that windows 7 uses kernel 6.1 can easily tell the difference, making it a non issue beyond the semantics of 6.1 equalling 7. The compatibility that the versioning provides more than makes up for it, the majority of developers don’t need to rewrite or at least recompile their software just to run under a new version number, saving time and money for everyone.

          Win-win situation, it’s just unfortunate it annoys you so much.

    • Chris July 14, 2009 at 10:50 am #

      What Vigilante says is true and the real reason behind the versioning. Microsoft kept Win 2000 and WinXP under the 5 series (5.0 and 5.1 respectively), to keep them compatible. There are thousands of apps out there that condition its compatibility with the first digit of the version number.

      MS is doing the same with Win7 and keeping it compatible with Vista apps.

      Some idiots ask if this were the case, then why did MS change version number to 6 when they made Vista? The answer is simple, XP and Vista ARE NOT compatible. They were righteous to make the number change and this way notify the applications of the compatibility issues that will emerge with XP apps running in Vista. Windows 7 is totally compatible with Vista so keeping it as 6 is good

  3. hardcandy July 14, 2009 at 7:03 am #

    I have installed the x64 version of 7600 and I’d have to say it’s not bad, I’ve had a few issues with my sound card but nothing that can’t be fixed. Otherwise, it is a great release…err..leak!

    • blu-rayx July 14, 2009 at 9:10 am #

      Is your 7600 activated?

      • Vigilante July 14, 2009 at 12:16 pm #

        I doubt it; 7600 accepts only RTM keys, and unless by some feat of amazing luck he’s managed to guess a key months before the OS is officially released, or has found a hack for it, the os is not likely to be activated.

        However, by using slmgr.vbs -rearm when the 30-day grace period is due to end, he can get an extra 30 days from it – and he can rearm up to 3 times. So before the OS becomes unusable, he’ll be able to enter his genuine key assuming he’s actually going to buy the os, since it will work for a further 4 months (120 days) by which time the OS will be out.

        • colin July 14, 2009 at 7:20 pm #

          I stick to Windows 7 public RC, gives me a whole free year ;).

  4. Havoc July 14, 2009 at 1:29 pm #

    @Vigilante,

    Thanks for posting that i had forgotten what the re-arm command was, now my 7600 will at least last until after the release

  5. Gagan July 15, 2009 at 7:43 am #

    I hope windows seven 7600 build is not the final RTM. Windows NT & Windows xp 5 version series. MS always try to keep compatible windows versions …nd now Microsoft doing same things with version 6 .vista nd seven are same series….but I guess there will be no relation between version nd its final name…. Microsoft always played trick with final names…so let’s see what will be the name?

    • Anonymous July 20, 2009 at 5:10 am #

      Seriously, Gagan?
      No! Microsoft has already decided that the final name will be Windows 7 and they already started marketing the name long ago.

      • Tech July 22, 2009 at 9:25 am #

        Microsoft told us that would be the final name – they CAN change it if they want. M$ also told us there would be 2.5 million beta testers but what happened with that?

  6. Seeker July 17, 2009 at 2:18 am #

    Download here :
    Link removed – Everton

Leave a Reply