build 5456

Hi,
Anyone tried Build 5456 yet?
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
Cheers

Hello,

Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?

The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

Intresting.. thanks for the info.
So... of to download 5456 and rebuild my LAPPY again :D

"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message

Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

Just a point. 5456 is a Beta 2 build; just a later one than 5384. All builds prior to the first RC1 release will be Beta 2.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message

Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

5456 is an interim build :)
Whether it is from the beta 2 branch or the rc 1 branch is insignifigant ... "the" beta 2 release was 5384.
- JB

Is it not true that Beta 2 was developed from the 53XX branch and RC1 development is from the 54XX branch. Even though 5456.5 says Beta 2 does not make it so. "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message

Just a point. 5456 is a Beta 2 build; just a later one than 5384. All builds prior to the first RC1 release will be Beta 2.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

No, Beta 2 is a milestone not just a particular build.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message

5456 is an interim build :)
Whether it is from the beta 2 branch or the rc 1 branch is insignifigant ... "the" beta 2 release was 5384.
- JB

No, it is not true. In order to be in an RC1 build the beta code has to have passed rigorous mathematical testing in the testing labs before being checked into the current RC1 build. Just because a fix from 5384 meets the standard to be put in subsequent beta builds does not mean it meets the strict standards for the next milestone.
We are doing anecdotal testing and the first pass at a fix is based on that. The programmer may feel he has the fix but still need further anectodal feedback to confirm his thinking, so it moves forward to the next build in the current milestone. After a few dozen builds one will meet the guidelines for a drop to the TechBeta testers and the anectodal feedback starts coming in again.
When the team thinks the code truely is fixed it goes through thorough (mathematically provable) testing and is then checked into the next milestone.
Build numbers are just build numbers.
"SAM-R" wrote in message

Is it not true that Beta 2 was developed from the 53XX branch and RC1 development is from the 54XX branch. Even though 5456.5 says Beta 2 does not make it so. "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message Just a point. 5456 is a Beta 2 build; just a later one than 5384. All builds prior to the first RC1 release will be Beta 2.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

well, for whatever reason, Beta or RC, it's still not ready for prime time yet. There's two bugs I've found so far doing the upgrade. File names on my second drive are now dates only, and IE7 you can no longer us the favorite list. Dead as a doornail.
"Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message

No, it is not true. In order to be in an RC1 build the beta code has to have passed rigorous mathematical testing in the testing labs before being checked into the current RC1 build. Just because a fix from 5384 meets the standard to be put in subsequent beta builds does not mean it meets the strict standards for the next milestone.
We are doing anecdotal testing and the first pass at a fix is based on that. The programmer may feel he has the fix but still need further anectodal feedback to confirm his thinking, so it moves forward to the next build in the current milestone. After a few dozen builds one will meet the guidelines for a drop to the TechBeta testers and the anectodal feedback starts coming in again.
When the team thinks the code truely is fixed it goes through thorough (mathematically provable) testing and is then checked into the next milestone.
Build numbers are just build numbers.
"SAM-R" wrote in message Is it not true that Beta 2 was developed from the 53XX branch and RC1 development is from the 54XX branch. Even though 5456.5 says Beta 2 does not make it so. "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message Just a point. 5456 is a Beta 2 build; just a later one than 5384. All builds prior to the first RC1 release will be Beta 2.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

Seems like people get hung up on semantics.
Yes, Beta 2 is a milestone....so once we hit the milestone it was done, and everything after was Post-Beta 2(or whatever the milestone was...) In that nominclature, these would be post Beta2 interim builds/Pre RC builds. But that was in the day when you only called somehting RC when you thought it was a Release Candidate...as opposed to the current feeling that RC1 will be first in a PLANNED string of builds being called RC...ah the good old days...
I honestly do not know what "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message

No, Beta 2 is a milestone not just a particular build.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message 5456 is an interim build :)
Whether it is from the beta 2 branch or the rc 1 branch is insignifigant ... "the" beta 2 release was 5384.
- JB

The milestone is the beginning, not the culmination.
"Zapper" wrote in message

Seems like people get hung up on semantics.
Yes, Beta 2 is a milestone....so once we hit the milestone it was done, and everything after was Post-Beta 2(or whatever the milestone was...) In that nominclature, these would be post Beta2 interim builds/Pre RC builds. But that was in the day when you only called somehting RC when you thought it was a Release Candidate...as opposed to the current feeling that RC1 will be first in a PLANNED string of builds being called RC...ah the good old days...
I honestly do not know what "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message No, Beta 2 is a milestone not just a particular build.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message 5456 is an interim build :)
Whether it is from the beta 2 branch or the rc 1 branch is insignifigant ... "the" beta 2 release was 5384.
- JB

Well, of course its not ready for primetime. We all know that. But at least you are doing your part finding and reporting the bugs others will never have to see. Good job.
"Robert Rixx" wrote in message

well, for whatever reason, Beta or RC, it's still not ready for prime time yet. There's two bugs I've found so far doing the upgrade. File names on my second drive are now dates only, and IE7 you can no longer us the favorite list. Dead as a doornail.
"Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message No, it is not true. In order to be in an RC1 build the beta code has to have passed rigorous mathematical testing in the testing labs before being checked into the current RC1 build. Just because a fix from 5384 meets the standard to be put in subsequent beta builds does not mean it meets the strict standards for the next milestone.
We are doing anecdotal testing and the first pass at a fix is based on that. The programmer may feel he has the fix but still need further anectodal feedback to confirm his thinking, so it moves forward to the next build in the current milestone. After a few dozen builds one will meet the guidelines for a drop to the TechBeta testers and the anectodal feedback starts coming in again.
When the team thinks the code truely is fixed it goes through thorough (mathematically provable) testing and is then checked into the next milestone.
Build numbers are just build numbers.
"SAM-R" wrote in message Is it not true that Beta 2 was developed from the 53XX branch and RC1 development is from the 54XX branch. Even though 5456.5 says Beta 2 does not make it so. "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message Just a point. 5456 is a Beta 2 build; just a later one than 5384. All builds prior to the first RC1 release will be Beta 2.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB

Maybe for MSFT, but that is not how it was where it came from.
The Milestones were where bonuses were paid, or contracts were fulfilled.
At X date, the Milestone deliverable was due..if they hit it...they got their money..if they did not...they either defaulted on the contract, or just lost a bonus.
Yes, I know this for a fact, I was a product manager on a few projects with milestones and attached bonus'.
If what you say is true..then I have no idea how anyone ever knows what is happening.
As I mentioned in my earlier post, different companies have changed thier naming conventions to suit their changing purposes. "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message

The milestone is the beginning, not the culmination.
"Zapper" wrote in message Seems like people get hung up on semantics.
Yes, Beta 2 is a milestone....so once we hit the milestone it was done, and everything after was Post-Beta 2(or whatever the milestone was...) In that nominclature, these would be post Beta2 interim builds/Pre RC builds. But that was in the day when you only called somehting RC when you thought it was a Release Candidate...as opposed to the current feeling that RC1 will be first in a PLANNED string of builds being called RC...ah the good old days...
I honestly do not know what "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message No, Beta 2 is a milestone not just a particular build.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message 5456 is an interim build :)
Whether it is from the beta 2 branch or the rc 1 branch is insignifigant ... "the" beta 2 release was 5384.
- JB

Well here's your answer on the record from a MS official (as quoted in PROneTworks Vista Newsletter Vol 1, Issue 56) concerning confirmation of monthly TechBeta builds continuing with 5456:
"Jeff Putt, Director, Windows Client, Microsoft Australia announced the news today. "We're on the bug-hunt. This is still beta 2 code....""
"SAM-R" wrote in message

Is it not true that Beta 2 was developed from the 53XX branch and RC1 development is from the 54XX branch. Even though 5456.5 says Beta 2 does not make it so. "Colin Barnhorst" wrote in message Just a point. 5456 is a Beta 2 build; just a later one than 5384. All builds prior to the first RC1 release will be Beta 2.
"Jimmy Brush" wrote in message Hello,
Will .NET framework v3 work (old name WinFX) with this build?
The June CTP (just released) of .NET 3.0 will *only* work with Vista build 5456; it is not compatible with the Vista Beta 2 release. However, you can still download the June CTP and develop against it on Windows XP SP2 :).
- JB