(1) This is not an official release.
Thank you for clarifying this. However, this may lead to more misunderstanding and suggests that we have claimed this is the official release. When this thread was made, we had claimed that it was highly probable that these leaked files were the same ones being released to manufacturer. Since this leak and information became widespread, there has been a coda of silence ongoing about these files. No denial or authenticity claim has been made by Microsoft. As you know, once a RTM build is leaked, it is usually a matter of months or weeks before the files become generally available to the public. No new builds have appeared, which should prove a temporary relief for those who have installed this build. This is an enormous difference from claiming that we are an official release source, and I would like to make sure that it is very clear we have in no way indicated or suggested that.
(2) The MVP team leaders, who are Microsoft employees but work totally separate departments from the Windows 7 Product Group, do NOT have any authority to authorize sites to host these links. Nor do they have any authority to instruct sites to take them down. Therefore, silence or advising to leave "as is" is all they can do and should not be construed as an approval from Microsoft. (3) MVPs are not Microsoft employees and therefore we have no authority to speak for Microsoft in anyway. All we can do is advise of their policies and official announcements. (4) The Windows 7 SP1 Product Group is aware of this leaked build but has decided to not announce any action, if any, they are pursuing.
1234. Thank you for this information. We (the admins on this site) are also aware of this information, but some may not be. I was informed that the product team was contacted by a lead and that this is how the message has been handed down. If I seem to have indicated that the program has validated these files, that is not correct. I have been informed that they contacted the product team, and a message was then relayed indicating that the thread should be left alone. This gives no indication as to the authenticity of the files as the final release version. This is only an internal indicator we are using to understand that we are not being asked to take down the files. As to the extent of the conversation that took place between one of our admins and his connection there, I do not have full access to this conversation, nor can I weigh in on the conversation, put words in his mouth, or give any specific details about it other than the information already presented.
Our podcast better explains the reason why we are being cautiously optimistic about this release, but why some of our people would rather not comment. That optimism is also being met with a real level of careful analysis and precaution, and so I have tried to provide, to the best of my ability, the facts as we know them, about these files. This includes information on how to properly back up your system prior to installing the files, how to uninstall the files, how much information has been personally conveyed to me about the files, and what precautions to take before dealing with these files. These files certainly do come with the inherent risk factor of them not being the final bits, and we won't know until the end of the first quarter of this year.
We will continue to seek information until more information is forthcoming. If there is an opportunity to get official information, I will try to pursue those avenues. At this time, our options are limited, but our hands are not tied in trying to find out more. Although we believe we will not get any forthcoming information until everyone else does, it does not hurt for us to try to do this.
All official indications are that the "official" release will be as originally announced, in March 2011. I think it very unlikely the final release will be the same build as the leaked build, even if the official release is next week. Why? Because of all the time that has already elapsed since the leaked build was released. Noting the digital signature of the leaked build was November 21, that's over 9 weeks already and it is likely to be several more weeks. Again, it has been announced that it will be released in March. Therefore, to inquire before then would be pointless.
This is where I disagree with you. Primarily because I have not seen a release date of March 2011. Do you have a source that says it will definitely be made available in March? In fact, I have seen statements that it will be released by March,
at the latest, and not during March itself, precisely. March is one possible month. The information we have seen states "availability during the first quarter of the calendar year". That includes March. There is no indication that it will be released during the month of March, exactly. Granted, you could also argue against February. To be precise, this information comes exactly from the Windows 7 Team Blog, in an article titled "
Windows 7 Momentum and Customer Guidance". An excerpt that has been widely debated states
"...we announced the Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 1 (SP1) Release Candidate availability, with the final version available in first quarter of calendar year 2011."Do you have a source that says it will be released in the month of March?
Also, if we can draw comparisons, Windows Vista Service Pack 1, which was a much more critical release, was digitally signed on January 31st, 2008. It was not released to manufacturers until February 2008, and not released to the general public until March of the same year. That was a 6.7 week release window from when it was digitally signed until when it was made available on Windows Update. During that time, there was no change. We simply do not have sufficient information to say that this is the official release, because we do not have a confirmation or a denial. That information will likely come in the form of the official release being made available, an official statement, or official information being conveyed to a well-known source.
I am still optimistic that this is the final build. I believe the delay may be in the fact that it is not urgent. While I do not see harm in providing these files if people need them, it becomes absolutely urgent that individuals follow the precautionary procedures prior to the installation. In the event that Digerati is correct, and that development did continue, that means this would not be the final version. To obtain and install the final version, you would need to use a safe method to uninstall this build and install the correct one. General testing shows this should not be a problem, as once this Service Pack is uninstalled, workstations are restored to a state they existed in prior to the installation.
A form of deductive reasoning is being used to form postulations about these files. The Service Pack should not be mass-deployed on systems until there is an official release from Microsoft. As stated previously, the good news seems to be that no real denial that these are the final bits has been made by anyone in a position of authority yet, the registry entries check out, the digital signatures are real, the timing was right, and no new leaks of any later builds have taken place.
The files are here for support, and it has not been an easy road to host them. If you want to give it a go, or have some kind of emergency problem that may require you to use these files, that is why they are here. Only when we get an official release from Microsoft, as stated in the original post, will we know with 100% validity.