Windows 98 Build 1022

Hello,
I have been browsing through my old hard drives, and i have found this build of windows 98. It's installer was like Windows 95, but instead of 95, it only said Windows. When it booted, it had a blue and black checkerboard wallpaper (the checkerboard was a placeholder?). There was an empty image file on the desktop named msnialog. When i opened up system properties, the little monitor was showing the same checkerboard wallpaper that was on the desktop. It didn't have the "Hardware profiles" and the "Performance tab. The clock was missing from the taskbar. I launched MS-DOS mode and it printed out "Microsoft(R) Windows
(C)Copyright Microsoft Corp 1981-1996". I have also found an old build of 98 that has a very early final installer (still doesn't mention 98, but only Windows? weird) that looks like this.
Here are the screenshots: https://imgur.com/a/oy2p84u

Comments

  • Possibly a Windows 96 Nashville build.

  • And do you know something about that installer?
    It seems to install something, and then just hangs there...

  • I don't know about the first one.

    I don't think Windows would know what a Pentium II was in 95/96 (Windows 95 doesn't recognize anything newer than a Pentium Pro and 98FE doesn't recognize anything newer than a Pentium II, in system properties) and this build would probably be older than OSR2 which is build 1111 and was released in August 1996. Does it work with FAT32? So I'm not certain as to its authenticity. I'd like to see it.

    As for the other one, it could be between build 1525 and 1546 since it doesn't mention Windows Memphis or Windows 98. Or possibly a very early Windows Millennium build (before build 2332). But if you can't get it to install, maybe look in the cabs to find important files (explorer.exe, vmm32.vxd, etc) with timestamps and file versions.

  • Hi, there was an nfo in the directory of the first one. I'm gonna check it tomorrow because it's night for me.

  • @iamaProCollector2000to10 said:
    Hi, there was an nfo in the directory of the first one. I'm gonna check it tomorrow because it's night for me.

    __ ___ _ __ __ _ _
    \ \ / () | | | \/ | | | ()
    \ \ /\ / / _ _ __ | | _____ _____ | \ / | ___ _ __ ___ _ __ | | _ ___
    \ \/ \/ / | | '_ \ / |/ _ \ \ /\ / / __| | |\/| |/ _ \ '_ _ | ' | '_ | / |
    \ /\ / | | | | | (| | () \ V V /__ \ | | | | __/ | | | | | |) | | | | _ \
    \/ \/ ||| ||_,_|_
    / _/_/ |/ || |_|_|_| |_| |_| ./|| ||_|
    /
    | |
    |_|

    leaked by:
    Leak date: 5 July 97
    Very early look at the new Windows. This build is already old, because somebody sent >! me a new build with a code-name of Memphis. Look out for that, beta hunters!
    Patched to work with Pentium II.

    I have removed the leaker's name.
    the garbled art was Windows Memphis
    It can read the file structure of F32, cannot open files, nor write them. The support is very hit or miss and it doesn't support drives with more than 16GB.

  • So does anyone know anything more about these builds?

  • edited May 18

    Unfortunately there isn't much on build 1022. This was the only reference I could find to it on BA, in a thread that is supposed to be comedic fiction as opposed to serious discussion:

    https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2124&start=1475

    He found several more unknown builds and copied 5 GB of Chicago, Janus, Whistler, Nashville (Build 1022), and Memphis builds to his computer. After testing these builds, none of them were real.

    Based on this, it may be eluding to a really old hoax or something that was genuinely lost for a long time. But you should consider uploading both builds to a site like mega so that we can check them out or tell us what warez CDs they came from.

  • That installer is out of place, as early Codename Memphis installers look quite different. The 1996 part could easily mean it is a early Windows 95 OSR2 build, but that installer gives me doubt.

  • The installer is from a different build.

  • edited May 19

    @robobox said:
    That installer is out of place, as early Codename Memphis installers look quite different. The 1996 part could easily mean it is a early Windows 95 OSR2 build, but that installer gives me doubt.

    If this is even real, I seriously doubt it's an OSR2 build, since it doesn't fit between the leaked builds 1009 and 1034 at all based on that screenshot.

    The installer screenshot, on the other hand, does not fit any known build of 98. That overall setup look was finalized between builds 1559 and 1569, but no other leaked build has the Windows logo in the title on the right, plus some strings don't match any leaked build either.

Sign In or Register to comment.