Windows 7: 7106 Bogus Alert!

I'm running the latest ISO download of

7106.0.090408-1623_x86fre_client_en-us_Retail_GRC1CULFRER_EN_DVD

that I downloaded last night. I've been very skeptical of it being authentic but I cannot seem to find very much wrong with this version.

Only three things bugged me at first: 1-most of the DLLs in the installation files use 6.1.7077 versions. 2-installation at one point made me chose English or Chinese and 3-there is no "Evaluation" watermark on the desktop.

After installation, everything points to this being 6.1.7106 and everything is in English. If someone has some suggestions for detecting whether this is real or fake, I would like to hear them.

The number right off there is different from the one being labeled a Russian to En as well as the first seen being called the Chinese to En translation. With two separate torrents those turned to be the exact same Chinese to En "supposed" 7106 found to be one of the older builds.

First off the one being mentioned on the thread here would see the winver in Chinese as well as the buttons with a change in the style of text on the tabs themselves. The one you have there seems to be something else and hopefully not another fake or bug infested wonder being pulled.

The lack of seeing "Evalution copy" and instead seeing "For testing purposes only" or this one without "any" watermark? should make you wonder right off!

Yes, it certainly did and what is even more curious is that I cannot even force it to show the Windows version on the desktop (even when running the windows classic desktop).

It runs very well, in fact it seems to run a tiny bit faster than 6.1.7077 (my perception, not measured) that I have on another partition. I've been playing with this installation all day and haven't seen any bugs other than a brief hiccup with the nVidia driver downloaded through Windows Update. It very very quickly recovered from that little snafu and kept right on marching. The after install behaviour is exactly the same as 6.1.7077.

I've placed the installation files on the hard disk in one folder and those of the 6.1.7077 installation into another. The intent is to compare the two and see if there are any major differences to note.

Robert

May be a little late, but one way you can ALWAYS tell the true build number, is to check a random dll file in your sys32 folder. Fakers can never change all the dll's, they simply change the shell.
Using a tool like Resource Hacker, open any random system dll and you'll get this..
One thing a fake can't do is change the version info in all system dll's, so this is probably the most accurate way to find out what you have

Good point! Chappy I took one at random that most wouldn't even consider and came up with the data of installation as well as the 7077 signature.

Already checked that in Windows Explorer - in case you had not seen it yet it is possible to have Explorer show you the Product Version of all files.

My 7077 installation first and then the 7106. As you can see the Product Versions are quite correct. Another little bug that is driving me nuts is the dates on the files 4/9/2009 at 12:31 am. The build number is "Build 7106.0.x86fre.winmain.090408-1623" which if I understand the numbers means a whole day elapsed somewhere in there as the files should be dated 4/8/2009 at 4:23 pm.

There is also a difference in the Kill Date - WinVer says 3/1/2010 7:59 PM and the Script Host says 6/1/2010 7:59:59 PM.

If it is a bogus installation or made up set of files, I take my hat off to the person who put it together.

Besides a good right click on the dll files themselves while winver can be hacked there the SIW tool and command prompt options are ways to look over the general system informaiton in more detail. The boot time is the first boot upon installation as well as the modified dates showing when they were unpacked during the initial copy of the setup files.

I just cleared the 60% mark on the same one for a quick look later. The one thing that should be of interest once installed would be the lack of the water mark even found on the bogus 7106 looked at before. It sounds a bit tampered with just the same.

Having run 7106 for a week, then going over to 7100 yesterday, I now can tell you the main differences.
7106 has no help pages, or if it does they are buried somewhere in there and have to be configured (I didn't try), click a ? icon and the viewer comes up saying there is no info for what you want.
The system itself in 7100 is more robust. 7106 couldn't unmount my external USB HD, 7100 can. Also, some programs would run only some of the time, some ran every time.

Welcome to the sevenforums first off! I guess you found out on your own that some of these leaks are not so genuine or untampered with in some way or another. I looked one of those over as well as one numbered as the 7100 that ended seeing a few oddities and was simply dumped.

With the two latest 7100s some secuirty scans being run now on each from another separate drive will typically expose any hidden bugs if present. But then if you download off torrent sites to begin with you may want to look over the thread started on a warning given by Microsoft. Microsoft: Don't Download Windows 7 from Torrents