Revealing Interesting Secret Behind Windows Build Numbers

If you are a Windows user and if you are interested in development phase of Windows when testing builds of Windows upcoming versions are released, then you must be aware of the build numbers or build strings of Windows.

Each Windows version whether its Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Windows 8, comes with a unique build number. For example the build number of the latest Windows 8 is 6.2.9200.16384.

Also each testing build of Windows such as Beta build, Release Candidate (RC) build, etc comes with a unique build number. People who keep a record of these build numbers, always wonder how does Microsoft create these build numbers? Is there any mechanism or algorithm behind these build numbers?

Today we are going to reveal a secret behind these build numbers. An AskVG reader "Vinay Godara" found an interesting fact behind these build numbers. So big thanks goes to him.

Actually since Windows Vista release, Microsoft is following a mathematical rule to create new Windows versions build numbers. Following are build numbers of Windows Vista, Windows 7 and Windows 8:

Windows Vista - 6.0.6000.16386
Windows 7 - 6.1.7600.16385
Windows 8 - 6.2.9200.16384

Do you see any similarity between these 3 build numbers? No? Here is the simple secret of these build numbers. If we remove the decimal points from these build numbers, each build number is created by adding 1159999999 in previous build number. Following formula will help you in understanding it:

Build number of new Windows version = Build number of previous Windows version without decimals + 1159999999

Examples:

Windows Vista = 6.0.6000.16386 (or 60600016386 without decimals)
Windows 7 = 60600016386+1159999999 = 61760016385 (or 6.1.7600.16385 with decimals)
Windows 8 = 61760016385+1159999999 = 62920016384 (or 6.2.9200.16384 with decimals)

Interesting? If the fact is correct and if Microsoft follows the same formula, then the build number of the next Windows version should be:

Windows next version = 62920016384++1159999999 = 64080016383 (or 6.4.0800.16383 with decimals)

So the build number of final version (RTM) of the next Windows version should be 6.4.0800.16383.

What do you think about this interesting find? Please feel free to share your opinion in your comment...





Share this article: Facebook | Twitter | Google+ | Reddit | Tell a friend

Posted in: Windows 7, Windows 8 / 8.1, Windows Vista, Windows XP


Other similar articles that may interest you


Comments

  • Mind blown VG, lol

  • Strange, because Rumors said Windows Blue will not be Windows 9, but will have the kernel updated to 6.3. May be Windows 9 will be as the formula said, 6.4.

  • Interesting topic!, thanks for sharing with us VG'

  • VG

    @Bill
    I said also known as Windows Blue. Because many websites are referring next version of Windows as Windows Blue. Anyway I have removed the word "Windows Blue" from the main topic to clear confusion. :)

  • What about XP and Vista? XP was version 5.1 (and 2000 5.0 before that), so what would be the relation between XP and Vista?

  • so, what this number mean? 1159999999
    is it meaningful for microsoft?

  • Windows Vista - 6.0.6000.16386
    Windows 7 - 6.1.7600.16385
    Windows 8 - 6.2.9200.16384

    so isnt this the correct pattern

    Windows Blue - 6.3.0800.16383.

    how to derive ?

    Simply add 1 to second set of number, 1600 to 3rd set and minus 1 from the last set of digits.

  • 1159999999 = num. of pirated copies made??? :D

  • That's so confusing -.-

  • Awesome. Didn't even know.

  • I have info that says 1600 is added to every release because that's the number of 'White House'.

    So the next version of NT Kernel would be 6.3.10800.16383

    Sixth version of NT upgraded thrice.

  • But they were going to make Windows 8 build 8888. Explain that?

    Also, if this is true, then Windows 9 will have a short build number of 0800. So...

    Windows Vista: 6000
    Windows 7: 7600
    Windows 8: 9200
    Windows 9: 800

    doesn't make sense. I predict Windows 9 to have a short build number of 10800.

  • excellent calculating work, Vinay.

    cant wait for Windows 9...

  • This is just nonsense. What the person "found" is just a lucky coincidence. Build numbers are just that, build numbers assigned by the compiler compiling the software. Every version of Windows is compiled using Visual Studio. You really think Microsoft spends time making sure the build number follows a pattern?

  • Read The Numerology of the Build: technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/jj663498.aspx in Technet Magazine

  • WoW! again VG

  • we'll see :)

  • Vista build
    6.0.6000.16386
    0.+1.+1600.-1
    Result win7 build
    6.1.7600.16385
    0.+1.+1600.-1
    Result win8 build
    6.2.9200.16384
    0.+1.+1600.-1
    Maybe win9 build
    6.3.10800.16383

  • it just a number... why should i care!

  • where will be the 6.3? :\

  • hello VG..!!!

    Thanks a lot for posting the story. :-)

    @kyle
    thanks you also.

  • I understand y microsoft refers different windows with numbers ie Windows 8 – 6.2.9200.16384 my question is what about Xp why they never refer the build number like others?please help me i need to understant

  • You're making this a lot more mysterious than it is, and misusing terms.

    The first two fields are the major and minor version numbers (not a 'build number'). They're manipulated by the usual sort of rules for software version numbers: if it is felt that the underlying OS is "just a small change" from the previous version, then increment the minor number (usually but not always by 1: NT 3.1 was followed by NT 3.5); else increment the major version number and reset the minor version to zero.

    The third field is the actual build number, and the basic rule for a build number is this: increment it by 1 every time you build the software, which probably done daily. Software development needs a different identifier for every single version of the software, which is why there are build numbers.

    It used to be that build numbers were strictly sequential, but at some point Microsoft started playing silly buggers, and skipping to a 'nice-looking' number for the released version.

    Parallel version development may require you to leave a gap; thus for example while you're still building version X.Y and using numbers like 1234,1235,1236,... you might also be building version X.Y+1 and using numbers like 1678,1679,1670... So you just need to leave a big enough gap based on your expected need for builds. It looks like Windows core development think that a gap of 1600 is enough space, it's probably 4 years worth of builds.

    I don't know what the last field represents. Where did you even see that displayed? 16384 looks suspiciously like a flag bit. Maybe with a service pack number in the low bits?

  • @lordrt
    I agree
    LOL

  • Maybe Leomate is right. Maybe that's the secret formula of Windows build number, because it's impossible to not have the 6.3 version of Windows. You should tjink about that, VG ;)

  • My guess:

    Windows 9 will be 6.3.10800.16383 (midsection 1 digit longer) or 6.3.2A30.16383 (same lenght, hex converted)... ;)

  • Hey VG, Today i am going to Submitting 2 requests together...

    1. It will be more interesting if you put DATE with every article and every post..Because when we try to know the release date of Beta or Final Version of applications Posted @ AskVG.com, we got disappointed.
    So, its a kind request Please put the article date with.

    2. this is a funny fact about M$ Windows 7 (May be this will also be same in Windows Vista and 8):-

    "Windows 7 Will allow you to change the Date of system till Dec. 31, 2099

    however you can still change the date till 31/Dec/8906 through 'Date' command via Command Prompt (your system will display the same date and time but will not monitor the days of week), for a date entered greater than 31/Dec/8906, it will show an error- "The system cannot accept the date entered".

    but with a simple trick, you can unlock the date till 06/Dec/8907.

    change the time of system to 23:59:59 [11:59:59 PM] through 'Time' command via Compand Prompt..within a second, the date will change to 01/Jan/8907 obviously.

    now again, you can increase the date till 06/Dec/8907 through 'Date' Command via Command Prompt..after that, it will show you the same error mentioned above.

    after that, you can only increase the Time till 00:19:00.0

    Furthermore, you can't change the "Date or Time" via any commands manually, you have to wait 24 hours to automatically change the day obviously."

    Thanks.
    Vinay Godara [VG}.

  • What was the build no. for XP??

  • What's the INTERESTING secret?

  • The build number for Windows XP is NT v5.1.x (depends on which Service Pack installed). 2000 was 5.0.x.

    Maybe the next Windows will be 7.0. Maybe the reason of the number 1159999999 is because they have that many "phases" of testing in their development plan. Seems like a huge number I know, but one day of development could have up to a hundred builds trying to perfect one tiny thing for example. Who knows.

  • Another build is Windows 8.1 6.3.9600.

  • Hi Vishal,
    I know about that bug of your site because of which you have disabled time on articles and comments. I just wanted to know in which month you wrote this article.

  • VG

    ^^ It was written in Feb, 2013.

Leave a Comment

(required)