New Java Runtime Environment Update (2)

[Shane]

I believe they do make them these days, Joan (as, of course, have Intel for
donkeys. I hope they appreciate them).

They certainly make graphics cards, having merged/swallowed ATI. In fact AMD
are making a high-end processor that integrates the graphics too, which I
eagerly await.

Shane

Joan Archer wrote:
> 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.

 

[Heather]

Just a minor detail......and he plans on dual booting? Bwa ha ha!!

"Joan Archer" <archer_joan@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:OQTXyZxxHHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>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.
>>
>
>

 

[Shane]

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

And why I'm always exhausted from Ping Pong! Actually I asked Parmaynu a
question on behalf of someone, but he never answered. It was severely
anticipated - but alas, and alack! And Aladdin. Alas and aladdin. I miss my
Aladdin paraffin heater. It is alack. Possibly the childhood of breathing
those fumes explains something too.


Shane

> 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

 

[Alias]

Joan Archer wrote:
> I always thought AMD was the processor not the motherboard.
> Joan

Me too. It says it right on the side of the box -)

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

 

[Shane]

No. No, Joan. Not without my caffeine. God but it's a sad, sordid business!
It still froths the milk, just won't force the water through the coffee - so
now I'm frothing milk and adding a little boiling water to Gold Blend (which
makes it like Camp, except not made from spit) and pouring that in. I can't
take more than one a day though! It's a come down from about half a dozen!


Shane



Joan Archer wrote:
> <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

 

[Shane]

Is that the 'claw hand' thing, Harry (that Maggie Thatcher had)? Though I
thought she only had it in one hand. I doesn't suppose it's pleasant in
one - in both must be rough!

Good luck, Harry. I hope you're feeling better than you were yesterday
(regardless of how you were feeling yesterday!).


Shane

webster72n wrote:
> 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]

Don't know about "claw hand", but it makes your hand(s) tingle and in severe
cases, like mine, almost feel numb.
I am recovering nicely and should be allright in a few weeks.

"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ev6YV1$xHHA.3564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Is that the 'claw hand' thing, Harry (that Maggie Thatcher had)? Though I
> thought she only had it in one hand. I doesn't suppose it's pleasant in
> one - in both must be rough!
>
> Good luck, Harry. I hope you're feeling better than you were yesterday
> (regardless of how you were feeling yesterday!).
>
>
> Shane
>
> webster72n wrote:
> > 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
>
>

 

[MowGreen [MVP]]

<AOL> Me, either </AOL>
Since Sun does not take security seriously, I'm uninstalling their java
runtimes from all of my systems.
Since June 29th there have been FIVE security bulletins issued on java,
2 of them highly **Critical**:
http://secunia.com/search/?search=Sun+java

Sun Java System Web / Application Server XSLT Processing Vulnerability
2007-07-11
Sun Java System Access Manager "message" Debug Level Password
Disclosure 2007-07-11
Sun Java JRE/JDK Processing of XSLT Stylesheets in XML Signatures
Vulnerability 2007-07-11
**Sun Java Web Start JNLP File Processing Buffer Overflow 2007-07-10**
**Sun Java Web Start Untrusted Application Arbitrary File Overwrite
2007-06-29**

I've tried for the last 2 and a half years to get them to at least have
their autoupdater remove older, vulnerable versions when a newer runtime
comes out, but they *refuse* to do it.
So, all Sun java will soon be buh-bye and that's one less vulnerability
vector to have to deal with.

How do they get away with such behavior ?
If MS behaved in the same manner it would be all over the media.
But since it's Sun, it's OK ?
Feh.

MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
===============
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
===============



Joan Archer wrote:

> 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]

Hi Mow <g> glad to see I'm not on my own with regards Sun Java, I think
there have only been a couple of things that wouldn't work because I
didn't have it installed and they were not important enough to warrant
doing it so I just go on my merry way without it <g>

I do still have Microsoft VM installed even though it is no longer
supported <g>
Joan


MowGreen [MVP] wrote:
> <AOL> Me, either </AOL>
> Since Sun does not take security seriously, I'm uninstalling their
> java runtimes from all of my systems.
> Since June 29th there have been FIVE security bulletins issued on
> java, 2 of them highly **Critical**:
> http://secunia.com/search/?search=Sun+java
>
>snip>

 

[MowGreen [MVP]]

There's no java anything here and so far, so good

" There goes the Sun
doo dah doo dah ... "

MG


Joan Archer wrote:

> Hi Mow <g> glad to see I'm not on my own with regards Sun Java, I think
> there have only been a couple of things that wouldn't work because I
> didn't have it installed and they were not important enough to warrant
> doing it so I just go on my merry way without it <g>
>
> I do still have Microsoft VM installed even though it is no longer
> supported <g>
> Joan
>
>
> MowGreen [MVP] wrote:
>
>><AOL> Me, either </AOL>
>>Since Sun does not take security seriously, I'm uninstalling their
>>java runtimes from all of my systems.
>>Since June 29th there have been FIVE security bulletins issued on
>>java, 2 of them highly **Critical**:
>>http://secunia.com/search/?search=Sun+java
>>
>>snip>
>
>
>