Didn't 22000.1 get all CUs up to .100 at this point? 21996.1 stopped right there as those are completely different builds? Personally I clean installed 22000.71 ISO I've converted with my hands from UUPdump (20000.51 + .71 CU integrated?) and I'm getting all later CUs without being an insider, directly via production Windows Update. The same happened when I clean installed 19041.1, which then got the same GA CUs and all CUs ever released for 19041, as that was the same build everyone officially got on D1, just received earlier without CUs.
Those are not RTM builds. They are also not brand new operating systems. If Windows 10 launched with a couple gigabytes of junk patched out there's no way I would have ever touched it.
19041.81 = first IP techbench ISO, released to insiders, 19041.208 = released to manufacturer 19041.264 = released to the general public. You seem to get stuck on RTM, MSFT only considers 10240.16384 as RTM.
Which is the same as 19041.1 + regular CU on top via Windows Update? I also clean installed that without being and Insider, and I just received all CUs including .264 (making it final) and beyond without any issue or need to do a full upgrade or reinstall/format. The point is that 19041.1 was the last full build that time, so if you clean installed 19041.1 + updated it to .264 via WU (regular CU, not full upgrade) or clean installed 19041.264 ISO directly, you would have ended up with the same identical OS from top to bottom. Current evidence clearly shows that Microsoft is doing the same with Windows 11, with 22000.1 as the last and final full build compiled for its October launch, then just CUs on top after that.
That's not true. I just said earlier today that I use an LTSC 2019 RTM OEM ISO as my personal OS. It has to go to an OEM to be an RTM. They get their own OEM ISO/IMG name, usually in the form of something like X21-96425 (using the example from the LTSC2019 with the minor cu from earlier.
So, you once installed 17763.107 (or the actual first release 17763.1), updated to 17763.2091.1.0 today. I believe i published the "RTM" release when trying to avoid to use of the term "RTM". Remember this convo was about whether MSFT will release a newly compiled build for when Win 11 will be publicly available (IF), all I tried to tell you (and i literally said) that all is or can be changed since you went offline.
don't forget that 17763 was a special case given the initial release was buggy and deleted some user profile. So it's the less significant edition ever about the discussed matter.
I am a RTM purist so I can un-RTM it forever via updates The manufs are often equally pissed about whatever build they're getting -- hence the feedback loop that is part of the purpose of RTM (!) -- so we're in good company.
The argument is and has always been about whether MS will issue this build eventually patched up with tons of files in a cumulative update form completely altering it from its current form or whether they will compile another build for the eventual RTM release. My money is on the latter. I also want to say that we know very little about the builds that OEMs get. They don't get shared a whole lot. The builds that do get shared often match the other builds you can find from VLSC or MS downloads in hashes, just not name. So often they are exactly the same ISO, let alone build. Any of the official MS ISOs could probably qualify to get installed on an OEM machine. Again, I don't know MS's internal policies so I don't know if they do or don't do this. They test all of their official ISO files fairly extensively. I saw a chart somewhere, I forget where. They test the main build something like 6 months if it's a newer build. Less time if it's a fix build where they fix issues with a previous build. Then I think they test an ISO for like a month. This could be old information at this point. They could have doubled their efforts so that they halved the time they take for testing. One of the reasons they do so few main builds is that it's easier to test the patches than the main builds. Beyond that, they have a base level of compatibility with hardware on each build that they cannot guarantee with newer builds. I have never seen a chart of what builds the OEMs get and what the hashes are and if those hashes match the MSDN files of old or the VLSC files. I've seen about a dozen OEM ISOs in total. They're kinda rare. They just don't get shared a whole lot. I can understand why. Depending on the timing of when the person received the image or the metadata, it might be pretty easy to tell who leaked the ISO/IMG. Though, I guess that assumes that there is something of value being leaked. We all rejoiced when Wzor leaked Win8, little did we know. I want to wait for the actual Win11 before I render any kind of judgement. I don't consider this insider build to be an adequate representation of the final result. I think the design philosophy will remain, but the non-visual elements are still not present. I'm still curious as I have been, which is why I'm still here.
Me too , I consider it a gift anyone who knows me , knows it's pointless even trying to get the last word in .. "why do you always answer a question with a question" , "I don't know , why do you ask "