Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.

Windows 7: Official Windows 7 RC Available Right Now!

07 May 2009   #441

windows 7 ultimate build 7077

ok 7100 build this is just a limited test then ...because im running 7700 ultimate and 7700 is higher than 7100,am i mistaken and this just another evaluation copy or the genuine thing as i know there are a lot of copy's out there(cracked) but the article reads that microsoft will be sending out updates canceling EValuation copy's on july 1st and august and that when installing windows 7 u were told to back-up your old windows as this was for testing perpouse only...please comment...

My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #442

Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1

You mean 7077, not 7700. There is no such build as 7700. 7100 is higher than 7077, and it's the Official RC build. You can run it for at least 10 months or so, by that time Windows 7 will likely be finalized by then.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #443

windows 7 ultimate build 7077

yes sorry my off work few beers but so whats the changes to 7100....
My System SpecsSystem Spec

07 May 2009   #444

El Capitan / Windows 10

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Night Hawk View Post
What people don't seem to grasp is how well these things can be tampered with by someone who would be considered a top notch programmer in the industry. They know how to falsify time stamps as well as other things giving the appearance of the genuine article by simply changing some of the coding itself not the size of any particular file.
That's precisely the reason that even better "programmers" (these folks like to be called computer scientists, thank you) came up with the concept of a digest. Now read carefully because hopefully I'm going to put this one to bed once and for all. It does require some understanding of mathematics so get your thinking caps on!

When virus "research" was in it's infancy many methods were found for adding a virus payload to a file without looking like you'd added a virus payload to a file. One way was to use a resource editor to carefully remove some non-code content like icons, etc. from the end of a PE (portable executable) image and then append your virus code to the file after carefully padding it out to the exact same file size. As filesystems became more robust folks were even toying with putting malware in NTFS alternate data streams. Needless to say so many ways to tamper with a file while leaving the same filesize were found as to make filesize alone a poor indicator of file integrity. Some other way was needed -- enter the checksum...

When serial communication was in it's infancy hardware limitations and just plain poor electrical design combined with legacy limitations of connected devices like modems, etc. brought the term "data corruption" into the vernacular of every computer geek at the time. When you sent data across a wire from one device to another there was a chance that what you would receive sent was subtly different than what you sent. That's hardly ever what you want And what's more, the problem seemed to increase as the square of the distance so a cable run twice as long was four times as likely to have transmission errors. Those "computer scientists" (not programmers, PLEASE!) also dabbled in mathematics. The main two parts of mathematics that are applicable to this problem are number theory and probability.

The obvious way to check for data corruption is to compare what you got with what you sent byte-by-byte. Sounds like a really simple easy solution, problem solved, let's move on. Not so fast... To do this comparison assumes that you have a copy of the original dataset on both sides of the serial link. So think about it, if you had that, you'd not need the serial link so much now would you? One of those bright beanie-wearing computer scientists turned to simple math for an inexpensive method for determining integrity of data moving across a serial link. Parity was thus born as is defined as the use of XOR (eXclusive OR -- a boolean operation) across fixed groups, or words, of data to create a parity word that can be used to detect errors in transmission by reapplication of the algorithm at the receiving end. I'll dispense with the proof here and let it suffice to say that single bits of change are detected flawlessly. Two-bit changes are detected at a rate of 1/n. Combine those rules and changes to odd number of bits are always detected and even numbers at a remarkably efficient rate but still not a guarantee of integrity. We need more math...

Another algorithm know as a modular sum was introduced and widely used in early maninframes whose error detection rate was somewhat better than 1/n. It was used for a while until fixed size transmissions fell out of fashion and data transposition, null drop and truncation errors all came into play. A notable figure at this stage is JPLs Mark Adler, author of the zlib compression library and inventor of the Adler-32 checksum algorithm. His modification of the older Fletcher algorithm was a true step forward in computer science of the time due to it's speed and improved ability to catch errors. But it wasn't enough. Enter CRC-32.

This could go on and on but I think you get the point. More and better error correction algorithms have come over time. CRC-32 is even a part of the TCP suite of protocols that make the internet run. With the advent of cryptography more math is brought to bear resulting in things like a SHA-1 sum and other methods principally developed by computer scientists at RSA Data Security. As those algorithms have improved the concept of "statistical uniqueness" has arisen.

Two datasets that are too large to compare byte by byte (like our ISO files) are identified by CRC-32 or SHA-1 hashes (or both) and even if the filesize is the same and the date stamp and all other identifiable metadata is the same as well, they are referred to as "statistically unique" if their hashes differ. The inversion of this is also true, with the files being known as "statistically identical" if their hashes are the same. Each hash has a certain inherent accuracy rate and when two or more different hashing algorithms are employed their rates are multiplied. So for example, with an ISO file like ours and identical SHA-1 and CRC-32 hashes the probability that two files are different approaches zero asymptotically and quickly disappears over the digital resolution horizon.

The files are the same.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #445


Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by baarod View Post
The files are the same.
Good info, thank you..:)
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #446
Night Hawk

W7 Ultimate x64/W10 Pro x64 dual boot main build-remote pc W10 Pro x64 Insider Preview/W7 Pro x64

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Airbot View Post
You mean 7077, not 7700. There is no such build as 7700. 7100 is higher than 7077, and it's the Official RC build. You can run it for at least 10 months or so, by that time Windows 7 will likely be finalized by then.
A little longer until 6/1/2010 actually being now just over 11 months. But who is counting?

We're all at least hoping that all goes well and the finished 7 is even available later this year if ontrack! I can already see the long waiting lines on the release date for sure! "where does the line end?!"
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #447

Windows 7 Ultimate [Windows Vista Home Premium]

w00t Internet Explorer is showeing -3% Completed
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #448

Windows 7 Ultimate x86

w00t Internet Explorer is showeing -3% Completed
lol, looks lke negative 3%... like MS is taking it back
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #449
Night Hawk

W7 Ultimate x64/W10 Pro x64 dual boot main build-remote pc W10 Pro x64 Insider Preview/W7 Pro x64

I think more and more people are finally getting the idea that going to MS for the public release is the best option to start with! Can you imagine just how many are presentlng trying to download copies from those servers? It's likely astronomical!
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 May 2009   #450

Windows 7 Ult x64(x2), HomePrem x32(x4), Server 08 (+VM), 08 R2 (VM) , SuSe 11.2 (VM), XP 32 (VM)

and baarod +rep for a simple explaination (and history..)
of hashing and data integrity algorithms...
(alot of 50 cent words but hey it is what it is..)
My System SpecsSystem Spec

 Official Windows 7 RC Available Right Now!

Thread Tools

Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
New SSD Install from Official Windows iso
Hey guys! I'm here because my new Install does not have good Graphics. I used Driver Magician to transfer all the drivers, so all are from the Official Toshiba Install on the old HDD. I really don't understand this and it happened before. Before, I installed the W7 Officail iso along side of...
Installation & Setup
Where are official MD4 and SHA-1 for Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64 iso?
Since digital rivers is down, I'm resorting to a subreddit. I don't know the link policy here, so I won't link it. I need the MD5 and SHA-1 from the digital river ISO's so I can compare them and see if I got a ****ed up ISO or filled with viruses or whatever. Thanks.
General Discussion
Official Windows 7 RC x86 Size
Can anyone tell me ,what is the original size of x86 ? is it 2.36 gb or 2.35 gb? In some torrents it is 2.35 and some it is 2.36 gb.. So wanted to confirm.... Note:- I cannot download from MS site due to some reasons :cry:
General Discussion
Windows 7 Official Beta
The official beta has just surfaced in Microsoft's Taiwan's technet site, but does not seem to be active just yet. Is this a sign of things to come over the next few days? TechNet Evaluation Center

Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29.
Twitter Facebook Google+