Talk:Nickel

Server builds
I think server builds like the recently released server build 22463 should be on a page called Windows Server vNext. The 19100.xxxx builds are there on the team vnext page, so i think the server cobalt and nickel builds should be placed on that page. Reason why? SAC is dead MikeShinoda2001 (Norman) 17:22, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The Semi-Annual Channel being dead is not a good enough reason to put the server builds on a separate page. Jurta (talk • contribs) 17:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * No, the Server builds are also not tied to any specific release. If that were the case, then the Windows 10 post-20H1 Dev Channel builds would have to be considered Windows 11 builds. Kendrenogen
 * microsoft refers to 22463 as server vNext. MikeShinoda2001 (Norman) 17:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That doesn't matter. It's still a Nickel build, whether you like it or not. Jurta (talk • contribs) 17:40, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Microsoft also called many Windows 10 Insider releases Windows 10 vNext. Windows Server vNext is not an official name. Kendrenogen
 * Oh ok then... =( MikeShinoda2001 (Norman) 17:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 19100 is on a separate page because it has a different build number from anything else. I don't get how SAC being dead ties into this either, does that make 22463 not a Nickel build or whatever? You also noted in the 2022 rename discussion and the argument was just as irrelevant as it is here imho -- 17:55, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Just because the Semi-Annual Channel is dead, it doesn't mean that you'd have to split the pages into two; they are still part of the same OS development cycle. - pivotman319 (📫) 18:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Well for server 2022, i consider MN a part of server 2022's development, and so i consider anything before 20201 a server 2022 build. Anyway back to the topic, maybe we should call it something like nickel server idk. MikeShinoda2001 (Norman) 18:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Note: MN is the cheminal symbol of Manganese

Are Nickel (22H1) builds actually a part of Copper (22H2) builds?
Many sources say that there's no Nickel (22H1) and builds 22449+ are Copper builds. Are these sources actually true?
 * The start of a new release cycle is usually associated with a build number skip, but we haven't noticed one yet. Sounds false to me. -- 19:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I still don't see any evidence that these builds are Nickel (22H1) builds and not Copper (22H2) builds. Because it looks like we are not going to get any build with ni_release lab. I think Microsoft will skip build number to 23xxx then release builds with cu_release lab. User:31.200.51.92 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The Windows as a service model follows the Azure semester scheme, and here, it clearly states that they have moved to Nickel. Jurta (talk • contribs) 10:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I said that the Dev channel will receive Cooper (22H2) builds in March so we will have builds from the  lab in February
 * Now, I believe that these builds are Nickel builds and not Copper builds. Topic can be closed.

Windows 10 Nickel builds
Early Nickel builds are based on Windows 10, and it have released to Canary ring. Note: Canary builds are avaliable only for microsoft and other manufacters
 * Every release of Windows is based on the previous versions. That's nothing new. -- 19:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Rename the article to "Windows 11, version 22H2"
The Dev channel (formely Fast ring) will start receive builds from Copper, the 22H2 semester of Windows as a service in March. Can I move the article "Nickel"to"Windows 11, version 22H2" please?
 * Reminder that the development semesters are not tied to any Windows release. Jurta (talk • contribs) 18:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I known but because server counterparts of Manganese and Iron are in the list of known Windows Server 2022 builds, I want to do the same thing and make an article called "Windows 11,version 22H2", that's because I want that Nickel and Cooper builds be in the same article.
 * Because those builds are specifically server builds, it's a different story for the other builds. Besides, there's no confirmation for the next server version, so it's way too early to make a server page for those builds. Jurta (talk • contribs) 19:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Move Server builds to "Windows Server vNext'
Its not too good to have a official Cooper Server build released before the first client build. I would like to move Server builds to a seperate article called "Windows Server vNext" Windows Server vNext is a good name. why not? Just like the upcoming Windows 10 Team update. Ilyes (talk) 12:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The builds are still part of the Nickel semester. Xeno (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I known but I don't want a Cooper Server build released before a Copper client build. Just look at MikeShidona2001's discussion to move server builds to "Windows Server vNext" I already said that my reason is that having a Copper client build after a Cooper Server build is too bad. Ilyes (talk) 05:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Complain to Microsoft then. We don't control what builds they release to Insiders. Jurta (talk • contribs) 07:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Why so early on The Beta Channel?
It's still a long time away from the next major update of Windows 11. (22H2). I guess the Beta Channel has evolved a lot since Cobalt?