Windows 95 build 34

4.00.34

Build of Windows 95
OS family	Windows 9x
Version number	4.00
Build number	34
Architecture	x86

Windows 95 build 34 is one of the earliest confirmed builds of Windows 95. It is mentioned in the OLDSETUP.INF file from later Chicago builds, such as build 58s.

PLEASE NOTE: The information presented below has been derived from a combination of observations made from the available video footage and leftover files, as well as the author's own speculations. It is important to note that this information should be treated as speculative in nature, as it does not necessarily represent established facts.

Setup leftovers

OLDSETUP.INF is a remnant of previous Chicago builds, together with SETUP31.VER, SETUP31.EXE, SETUP31.INF and OLDSETUP.BAT. It gives a pretty good insight into the installation process of pre-58s builds. These files indicate that early Chicago setup was merely a rebranded Windows 3.1x setup and did not include major changes or new features. The new setup, as seen in build 58s, was likely introduced as part of the M4 stage.

Early leaked builds also still include the old Windows 3.1x-like boot screen, SYSLOGO.RLE, which is also a leftover from previous builds and may have been used in build 34.

; Nagaras MergeReg.exe as the shell
system.ini, Boot, "shell="    ,"shell=mergereg.exe"
;
; Remove these as of build 34. Were reverting back to Win 3.1 Comm support.
;
system.ini, 386Enh, "device=?Pcommdrvr.386"
system.ini, 386Enh, "device=?Pw3_prtcl.386"
system.ini, 386Enh, "device=?Pxon_xoff.386"
system.ini, 386Enh, "device=?Pcts_rts.386"
system.ini, 386Enh, "network=vbrowse.386"
system.ini, 386Enh,"cachepages="
system.ini, 386Enh,"device=regvxd.386"
system.ini, Boot,,"scrnsave.exe=stressme.scr"

The file also contains the following line:

;!:README.EF      removed for M32 external release. MC.

Internal documents

An internal Microsoft document claims there was an early PDK from the M3 stage sent to 40 ISVs in March 1993. The build is said to have had "Win32s level support for 32-bits", and the developers said they "kept the new shell out of this release".

According to another internal Microsoft document from 7 April 1994, "M3 prebeta MS release" was made on 22 January 1993. The first PDK release, mentioned above, is now referred to as "M32" (possibly meaning M3.2, a naming convention seen later on in the development of Windows 95) and was released on 8 March 1993, according to the document.

Judging by the information gathered from OLDSETUP.INF and the documents, it appears that build 34 could be the M32 external release from early March 1993 that was sent to a few people, which means it was probably compiled in late February or early March 1993. The M3 pre-beta MS release was most likely released internally at Microsoft (as the name suggests) and may even be related to the builds shown in the Usability Testing video.

YouTube video

There is also a video claiming to show this build by user George Wolfowitz. As this build remains unleaked, the authenticity of the video cannot be confirmed. Some observations from the video:

• "Personal" and "Programs" folders on the desktop are only links to these folders.
• The Help button icon is from build 58s, but the System icon (a computer) is the same as in the Usability Testing builds.
• The Help menu is missing some items.
• The boot screen shown is the already mentioned SYSLOGO.RLE, also found in later builds (though no longer used).
• "About Chicago" dialog properly displays user and company information, unlike build 58s which displays placeholder strings. This could suggest the setup used in this build asks the user for username and organization information.
• The Control Panel (CONTROLS.SYS) title bar icon is different.
• Three Control Panel items are missing, while some others have different icons.

It is worth noting that the uploader has not been active since the video was uploaded, casting suspicion on their intentions with this video.

Fake screenshots

Several screenshots of this build were posted by betaguy224, but they were proven to be fake by the Usability Testing video.