New Java Runtime Environment Update (2)

[George Gee]

You may well be right, I was only saying to the wife
the other day - "Those Windows ME AMD systems are
very Java dependant ..."

George Gee


"TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:ePZOUGmxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> It may help to explain the reason there are 3386 versions of it in
> Add/Remove programs. )
>
> George Gee wrote:
>> You mean Harry got it wrong?
>> Well, well, well, fancy that, tisk, tisk, tisk.
>>
>> Can't find that blasted corkscrew! Only had it
>> half an hour ago ........
>>
>> George Gee
>>

 

[TomV]

Same one as you, Harry...the Java binge (without the cooking sherry).

webster72n wrote:
> 're you on the binge too, Tom?
> As long as you're having fun...
>

 

[TomV]

LOL!

George Gee wrote:
> You may well be right, I was only saying to the wife
> the other day - "Those Windows ME AMD systems are
> very Java dependant ..."
>
> George Gee
>
>
> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:ePZOUGmxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> It may help to explain the reason there are 3386 versions of it in
>> Add/Remove programs. )
>>
>> George Gee wrote:
>>> You mean Harry got it wrong?
>>> Well, well, well, fancy that, tisk, tisk, tisk.
>>>
>>> Can't find that blasted corkscrew! Only had it
>>> half an hour ago ........
>>>
>>> George Gee
>>>
>

 

[George Gee]

Harry

I would've thought "Thank you Tom for pointing out my error"
would've been more appropriate.

George Gee


"webster72n" <webster72n@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e5qRvPmxHHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
> 're you on the binge too, Tom?
> As long as you're having fun...
>
> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:ePZOUGmxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> It may help to explain the reason there are 3386 versions of it in
>> Add/Remove programs. )
>>
>> George Gee wrote:
>> > You mean Harry got it wrong?
>> > Well, well, well, fancy that, tisk, tisk, tisk.
>> >
>> > Can't find that blasted corkscrew! Only had it
>> > half an hour ago ........
>> >
>> > George Gee
>> >
>> >
>
>

 

[Heather]

Wot?? Harry got it wrong?? Shame on him. OTOH, why ruin his record of
3 years or so, grin.

The corkscrew is over here on MY table, beside the white wine. Durned
drunks, can't see a dam thing!!

"George Gee" <georgegee@nomaps.com> wrote in message
news:e5yrD%23lxHHA.3720@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> You mean Harry got it wrong?
> Well, well, well, fancy that, tisk, tisk, tisk.
>
> Can't find that blasted corkscrew! Only had it
> half an hour ago ........
>
> George Gee
>
>
> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:OSo9MzlxHHA.3684@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Harry,
>>
>> That's for a 64 bit Windows system with an AMD processor. If your OS
>> is Windows ME, it's not 64 bit. And update 12
>> (jre-1_5_0_12-windows-amd64.exe) is available for 64 bit systems as
>> well.
>>
>> Here's the link (it's at the bottom of the page):
>>
>> https://sdlc4a.sun.com/ECom/EComActionServletjsessionid=9C407621F522C7231084311AD6DC3A2D
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> webster72n wrote:
>>> Tom:
>>>
>>> Uner "Download and Install", after clicking on the "Download"
>>> button, you'll
>>> find a note saying "for AMD based Windows systems use version
>>> 'jre-1.5.0_11-amd64.exe'. My system happens to be AMD-based.
>>> That should clear it up for you, Tom.
>>> As for Heather and George,
>>> I wonder who is drinking what and in how many "versions"?
>>>
>>> Harry.
>>>
>>>
>>> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:ORsc7VlxHHA.5068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> webster72n wrote:
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>> news:OZAHfBkxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> webster72n wrote:
>>>>>>> For AMD based windows systems they recommend to use 1.5.0_11,
>>>>>>> TomV.
>>>>>> Who are "they"?
>>>>> "They" are: www.java.com.
>>>>> Just look under :"instructions" for download and installation.
>>>>> Thought you might summarize that, Alias.
>>>>>
>>>> Harry,
>>>>
>>>> I don't know what you're referring to on the page. Perhaps you
>>>> could
>>>> "summarize that." Why would Sun recommend a version with security
>>>> vulnerabilities for AMD processor based systems? It doesn't make
>>>> sense.
>>>>
>>>> From the page you referenced:
>>>>
>>>> "Intel and 100% compatible processors are supported."
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>
>

 

[Shane]

I thought you were about to introduce Parmaynu there George!


Shane


George Gee wrote:
> Heather
>
> Better tread carefully here, after all Harry is a known expert
> with Java, he does have 3386 versions of it in Add/Remove programs.
>
> George Gee
>
>
> "Heather" <figgyd@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:%23SdUlOlxHHA.2432@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "webster72n" <webster72n@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:eQGVnLkxHHA.3328@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>> news:OZAHfBkxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> webster72n wrote:
>>>>> For AMD based windows systems they recommend to use 1.5.0_11,
>>>>> TomV.
>>>>
>>>> Who are "they"?
>>>
>>> "They" are: www.java.com.
>>> Just look under :"instructions" for download and installation.
>>> Thought you might summarize that, Alias.
>>
>> Damned if I can find these people.......the "theys" he refers to. I
>> checked under Download and Installation and no Theys there.
>>
>> You into the cooking sherry again, Harry??

 

[webster72n]

"George Gee" <georgegee@nomaps.com> wrote in message
news:%23Ld4EhmxHHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Harry
>
> I would've thought "Thank you Tom for pointing out my error"

what error???
Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
And I still think, Tom is sneaking some "scherry" in his "Java".

> would've been more appropriate.
>
> George Gee
>
>
> "webster72n" <webster72n@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e5qRvPmxHHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >
> > 're you on the binge too, Tom?
> > As long as you're having fun...
> >
> > "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
> > news:ePZOUGmxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >> It may help to explain the reason there are 3386 versions of it in
> >> Add/Remove programs. )
> >>
> >> George Gee wrote:
> >> > You mean Harry got it wrong?
> >> > Well, well, well, fancy that, tisk, tisk, tisk.
> >> >
> >> > Can't find that blasted corkscrew! Only had it
> >> > half an hour ago ........
> >> >
> >> > George Gee
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
>

 

[TomV]

Harry,

You're just not getting it. You're using the Java version for 64 bit
systems. I told you where to check...enough said. If what you're using
is working for you, great. Ignorance is bliss, eh?

Tom

webster72n wrote:
>
> what error???
> Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
> And I still think, Tom is sneaking some "scherry" in his "Java".
>

 

[Alias]

webster72n wrote:
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:OZAHfBkxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> webster72n wrote:
>>> For AMD based windows systems they recommend to use 1.5.0_11, TomV.
>> Who are "they"?
>
> "They" are: www.java.com.
> Just look under :"instructions" for download and installation.
> Thought you might summarize that, Alias.

What do you mean by "AMD"?

Alias
>
>>> I already have that version installed and will keep it, accordingly.
>>>
>>> Harry.
>> I have an AMD processor (XP 2200, XP 3000+ and AMD2 4600) on three
>> computers and all three have the latest Java RE 6, Update 2 with no
>> problems whatsoever. Two are running XP Pro in English and the dual core
>> is running XP Home in Spanish.
>>
>> Alias
>>>
>>> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OKGjbYjxHHA.4392@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi, Heather,
>>>>
>>>> If you're going to stay with JRE 1.5.0, it's probably best to use
>>>> 1.5.0_12. IIRC there were a number of security vulnerabilites fixed in
>>>> this release.
>>>>
>>>> http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index_jdk5.jsp
>>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/ReleaseNotes.html
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Tom (not David Lipman ))
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heather wrote:
>>>>> And I will stick with version 5.....11. Does the job. Don't like the
>>>>> version 6 ones. (looking over my shoulder to see if Lipman catches my
>>>>> statements, lol).
>>>>>
>>>>> Heather
>>>>>
>>>>> "Joan Archer" <archer_joan@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:uqHMT0gxHHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> I can give that a miss, I don't have Sun Java on here <g>
>>>>>> Joan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alias wrote:
>>>>>>> Get it at www.java.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>
>
>

 

[Shane]

webster72n wrote:
> "George Gee" <georgegee@nomaps.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Ld4EhmxHHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Harry
>>
>> I would've thought "Thank you Tom for pointing out my error"
>
> what error???
> Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.


He didn't really need to give you a link, Harry. Your own demonstrates his
point. Look at the *x64.exe* at the end of it. That means for 64-bit
operating systems. It seems extremely unlikely that your AMD processor is a
64-bit model, given past discussions here re upgrading. It is doubly certain
(that the file is not the one you're using) because you are using Windows
Millennium Edition. I have a 64-bit AMD processor - but the XP version it's
running is a 32-bit one and even I couldn't install the x64 JSE. It requires
a 64-bit operating system and XP and later come in 64-bit versions, but not
Millennium, nor - of course - will it, not ever.

So, yes, basically, with the x64 in the filename, it is a different file to
what you have. I would further presume - given Tom's point of questioning
their recommending a version with a security flaw - assuming that version
does indeed have such - that the x64 version does not have it. Meanwhile,
either the old x86 (32-bit Intel compatible) JSE build has the flaw and
you're still using it, or it doesn't have the flaw and so what?

I, however, am with Joan on Java. Except that my coffee machine doesn't work
anymore.

Shane

 

[Shane]

Tom, I don't think Harry is using it - not least from my own experience that
x64 versions of anything (almost?) never install on 32-bit systems. I rather
think he hasn't noticed the x64 in the filename or not attached any
significance to it. I may be wrong of course - and right or wrong I think I
must finally be a fully qualified pedant for even caring!


Shane



TomV wrote:
> Harry,
>
> You're just not getting it. You're using the Java version for 64 bit
> systems. I told you where to check...enough said. If what you're
> using is working for you, great. Ignorance is bliss, eh?
>
> Tom
>
> webster72n wrote:
>>
>> what error???
>> Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
>> And I still think, Tom is sneaking some "scherry" in his "Java".

 

[Heather]

Sigh.....is this what I have to look forward to when I hit "old age"??
Memory Loss......lack of comprehension.......alzheimers?? Think I will
stay "young".

H.
"TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:%23i3WSPnxHHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Harry,
>
> You're just not getting it. You're using the Java version for 64 bit
> systems. I told you where to check...enough said. If what you're
> using is working for you, great. Ignorance is bliss, eh?
>
> Tom
>
> webster72n wrote:
>>
>> what error???
>> Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
>> And I still think, Tom is sneaking some "scherry" in his "Java".
>>

 

[TomV]

Hi, Heather,

Have you ever heard the term "stunod"? It's sort of an Americanized
version of the Italian "testa dura", which literally translated means
"hard head". It's the only description that comes to mind for the
discussion with Harry. Except I (and others) may have a sense of
banging one's head against the wall. )

Stay young...it's the only way to go.

Tom


Heather wrote:
> Sigh.....is this what I have to look forward to when I hit "old age"??
> Memory Loss......lack of comprehension.......alzheimers?? Think I will
> stay "young".
>
> H.
> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:%23i3WSPnxHHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Harry,
>>
>> You're just not getting it. You're using the Java version for 64 bit
>> systems. I told you where to check...enough said. If what you're
>> using is working for you, great. Ignorance is bliss, eh?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> webster72n wrote:
>>> what error???
>>> Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
>>> And I still think, Tom is sneaking some "scherry" in his "Java".
>>>
>
>

 

[TomV]

Hey, Shane,

You're probably right about not being able to install the 64 bit version
on a 32 bit system. I can't profess to have any firsthand experience
with it. However, the reverse is possible.

As for feeling somewhat pedantic, I can relate to that, except that my
head hurts. )

Tom


Shane wrote:
> Tom, I don't think Harry is using it - not least from my own experience that
> x64 versions of anything (almost?) never install on 32-bit systems. I rather
> think he hasn't noticed the x64 in the filename or not attached any
> significance to it. I may be wrong of course - and right or wrong I think I
> must finally be a fully qualified pedant for even caring!
>
>
> Shane
>

 

[Heather]

Well...."bonehead" does come to mind. And I can certainly empathize
with banging one's head against the wall.

"Hellooooo, is there anyone in there??" A question I often want to ask
Harry.

I am endeavouring to "stay young"......but Mother Nature is fighting me
on that one, grin.

Cheers......Heather

"TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:uPmNgzpxHHA.3364@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi, Heather,
>
> Have you ever heard the term "stunod"? It's sort of an Americanized
> version of the Italian "testa dura", which literally translated means
> "hard head". It's the only description that comes to mind for the
> discussion with Harry. Except I (and others) may have a sense of
> banging one's head against the wall. )
>
> Stay young...it's the only way to go.
>
> Tom
>
>
> Heather wrote:
>> Sigh.....is this what I have to look forward to when I hit "old
>> age"?? Memory Loss......lack of comprehension.......alzheimers??
>> Think I will stay "young".
>>
>> H.
>> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:%23i3WSPnxHHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Harry,
>>>
>>> You're just not getting it. You're using the Java version for 64
>>> bit systems. I told you where to check...enough said. If what
>>> you're using is working for you, great. Ignorance is bliss, eh?
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> webster72n wrote:
>>>> what error???
>>>> Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
>>>> And I still think, Tom is sneaking some "scherry" in his "Java".
>>>>
>>

 

[George Gee]

Hi Shane
I didn't know you were into Robin Cooper!
Goes some way to explaining your sense of humour.

George Gee

"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e$LzhtmxHHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I thought you were about to introduce Parmaynu there George!
>
>
> Shane
>
>
> George Gee wrote:
>> Heather
>>
>> Better tread carefully here, after all Harry is a known expert
>> with Java, he does have 3386 versions of it in Add/Remove programs.
>>
>> George Gee

>
>

 

[Joan Archer]

<lol> What have you done to it then, we can't have you going without your
caffeine <g>
Joan

Shane wrote:
>
> I, however, am with Joan on Java. Except that my coffee machine
> doesn't work anymore.
>
> Shane

 

[webster72n]

Thank you for your explicit descriptions, Shane.
They show you care and that's being appreciated.
Of course I noticed ignoring the "64" along the way, but when I installed
the new version referred to by Alias, through the built-in update feature, I
received an error message and that threw me off.
Everything fell into place when I uninstalled the older version and replaced
it with the latest. Now I'm up-to-date, thanks to Tom, also.
As you might have noticed already, "they" don't have to worry about "getting
old", it's "automatic", sooner or later. If you play your cards right, it
may even be fun.
Just for informational purposes, last Wednesday I had my right hand carpal
tunnel surgery done (the left hand was done about 6 weeks ago) and I am
performing most of the tasks here left-handed.

Harry.


"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uM3MQTnxHHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> webster72n wrote:
> > "George Gee" <georgegee@nomaps.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23Ld4EhmxHHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >> Harry
> >>
> >> I would've thought "Thank you Tom for pointing out my error"
> >
> > what error???
> > Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
>
>
> He didn't really need to give you a link, Harry. Your own demonstrates his
> point. Look at the *x64.exe* at the end of it. That means for 64-bit
> operating systems. It seems extremely unlikely that your AMD processor is
a
> 64-bit model, given past discussions here re upgrading. It is doubly
certain
> (that the file is not the one you're using) because you are using Windows
> Millennium Edition. I have a 64-bit AMD processor - but the XP version
it's
> running is a 32-bit one and even I couldn't install the x64 JSE. It
requires
> a 64-bit operating system and XP and later come in 64-bit versions, but
not
> Millennium, nor - of course - will it, not ever.
>
> So, yes, basically, with the x64 in the filename, it is a different file
to
> what you have. I would further presume - given Tom's point of questioning
> their recommending a version with a security flaw - assuming that version
> does indeed have such - that the x64 version does not have it. Meanwhile,
> either the old x86 (32-bit Intel compatible) JSE build has the flaw and
> you're still using it, or it doesn't have the flaw and so what?
>
> I, however, am with Joan on Java. Except that my coffee machine doesn't
work
> anymore.
>
> Shane
>
>

 

[webster72n]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:eopXdSnxHHA.4184@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> webster72n wrote:
> > "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> > news:OZAHfBkxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >> webster72n wrote:
> >>> For AMD based windows systems they recommend to use 1.5.0_11, TomV.
> >> Who are "they"?
> >
> > "They" are: www.java.com.
> > Just look under :"instructions" for download and installation.
> > Thought you might summarize that, Alias.
>
> What do you mean by "AMD"?

"Advanced Micro Devices", with reference to my motherboard.
Meanwhile things are "squared away" and I am "up-to-date".
Thanks for the "alert". <H>.

>
> Alias
> >
> >>> I already have that version installed and will keep it, accordingly.
> >>>
> >>> Harry.
> >> I have an AMD processor (XP 2200, XP 3000+ and AMD2 4600) on three
> >> computers and all three have the latest Java RE 6, Update 2 with no
> >> problems whatsoever. Two are running XP Pro in English and the dual
core
> >> is running XP Home in Spanish.
> >>
> >> Alias
> >>>
> >>> "TomV" <t@nospam.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:OKGjbYjxHHA.4392@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >>>> Hi, Heather,
> >>>>
> >>>> If you're going to stay with JRE 1.5.0, it's probably best to use
> >>>> 1.5.0_12. IIRC there were a number of security vulnerabilites fixed
in
> >>>> this release.
> >>>>
> >>>> http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index_jdk5.jsp
> >>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/ReleaseNotes.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Tom (not David Lipman ))
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Heather wrote:
> >>>>> And I will stick with version 5.....11. Does the job. Don't like
the
> >>>>> version 6 ones. (looking over my shoulder to see if Lipman catches
my
> >>>>> statements, lol).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Heather
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Joan Archer" <archer_joan@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:uqHMT0gxHHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> I can give that a miss, I don't have Sun Java on here <g>
> >>>>>> Joan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Alias wrote:
> >>>>>>> Get it at www.java.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Alias
> >>>
> >
> >

 

[Joan Archer]

I always thought AMD was the processor not the motherboard.
Joan


webster72n wrote:
>>
>> What do you mean by "AMD"?
>
> "Advanced Micro Devices", with reference to my motherboard.
>