[Ascii2]

The most recent released version of Microsoft Corporation's Microsoft Java Virtual Machine seemed to be build 5.00.3812.

The main Java webpage at the Microsoft Corporation website ( http://www.microsoft...va/default.mspx ) specifies a build number 3812.

The build number 3812 is greater than 3810, which seemed to be the most recent released version of Microsoft Java Virtual Machine.

Does the build 3812 of Microsoft Java Virtual Machine exist?

Is or was build 3812 of Microsoft Java Virtual Machine publicly available?

Where may build 3812 of Microsoft Java Virtual Machine be acquired?

[war59312]

Looks like you would have had to buy the hotfix from Microsoft for $4,000.

[Ascii2]

war59312, on Oct 12 2008, 10:41 PM, said:

Looks like you would have had to buy the hotfix from Microsoft for $4,000.

Quite a high price. Where did you find the price information?

[enuffsaid]

You can't get Java from MS anymore. MS was sued by Sun and had to remove their Java downloads. So basically you're now stuck with JRE from Sun. If you search very hard on the Internet you can still find the Java downloads from MS.

[Glenn9999]

If it helps, you should be able to find a full install of Microsoft Java - I have 3805 sitting here on my install disk. Then to upgrade to 3810, MS patch #816093 will do it. I'm not aware of a download for 3812.

As the others said, though, it is best to not spend your time with the MSJVM and just get the Sun one. In fact, it hasn't been touched for so many years that I wouldn't be surprised that it's teeming with security vulnerabilities. Better in fact to look for the uninstaller that Microsoft put out and use that more than to look for the JVM.

[Ascii2]

Glenn9999, on Oct 20 2008, 07:11 PM, said:

If it helps, you should be able to find a full install of Microsoft Java - I have 3805 sitting here on my install disk. Then to upgrade to 3810, MS patch #816093 will do it. I'm not aware of a download for 3812.

Instead of using a patch to update to JVM build 3810, the full installer may be downloaded at http://download.windowsupdate.com/msdownlo...2a04af2b34d.exe (Rename to "MSJavWU.exe"). That full installer specifies that it can only update, however. To full install, the package may be extracted and run with command line switches (I forgot which) to full install. I usually install Microsoft Java Virtual Machine Build 5.00.3809 fist and use no reboot switch(/R:N), then Microsoft Java Virtual Machine Build 5.00.3810.

Glenn9999, on Oct 20 2008, 07:11 PM, said:

it hasn't been touched for so many years that I wouldn't be surprised that it's teeming with security vulnerabilities.

Actually, Microsoft Java Virtual Machine Build 5.00.3810 (not older builds) is quite stable, fast (for Java), and without apparent security problems. Its problem is that it does not run newer versions of Java or older versions that specifically require the Sun Microsystems Java virtual machine.

In contrast, the Sun Microsystems Java Virtual Machine had always been inferior in every respect (speed, security, stability, ability to correctly function) during the lifetime of development of the Microsoft Java Virtual Machine (if this were not so greatly the case, I wonder if Sun Microsystems would have bothered to sue Microsoft Corporation regarding Virtual Machine technology). After the settlement of the Sun Microsystems v. Microsoft Corporation lawsuit, the Sun Microsystems Java machine has unfortunately (as it is the only real developer of Java Virtual Machine product for Windows) gotten worse in quality of design.

For myself, the only Java Virtual machine I use is the Microsoft Java Virtual Machine.

On some client computers, I had managed to install and use both the Microsoft Java Virtual Machine and Sun Microsystems Java Virtual Machines. The Microsoft machine would run the it was capable of running, while the Sun machine would run the rest. Both machines would not function simultaneously—A most efficient configuration that supported the current Java version.

I was hoping that Microsoft Java Virtual Machine update existed supporting a newer version of Java (even slightly) and was acquirable.

This post has been edited by Ascii2: 20 October 2008 - 08:38 PM

[Glenn9999]

Ascii2, on Oct 20 2008, 09:36 PM, said:

In contrast, the Sun Microsystems Java Virtual Machine had always been inferior in every respect (speed, security, stability, ability to correctly function) during the lifetime of development of the Microsoft Java Virtual Machine (if this were not so greatly the case, I wonder if Sun Microsystems would have bothered to sue Microsoft Corporation regarding Virtual Machine technology). After the settlement of the Sun Microsystems v. Microsoft Corporation lawsuit, the Sun Microsystems Java machine has unfortunately (as it is the only real developer of Java Virtual Machine product for Windows) gotten worse in quality of design.

I found quite the opposite - that MSJVM was always quite inferior. As for your statements, let me correct them. Sun has always been the only real developer of JVMs. That was the issue of the lawsuit. MS changed their implementation to the point that it became another language.

http://news.cnet.com...001-251401.html
"Sun sued Microsoft for $35 million in 1997, saying Microsoft breached its contract by trying to extend Java so it would work differently, and presumably better, on Windows computers. Consequently, one of Sun's main arguments in the case was that Microsoft wrongfully advertised that its products were Java-compatible because, in Sun's eyes, they were not. Those changes broke the universality of Java, Sun argued."

http://www.javaworld...-javalobby.html
"Ross's response: "I don't know what to call what Microsoft is doing, but it's not Java." Ross describes the "Java core platform" as a combination of the language, the VM and its bytecodes, and the full class libraries. He emphasizes cross-platform portability, and sees Microsoft's decision not to ship what he considers a fully-compliant Java core platform in the new release of IE as evidence that Microsoft wants to balkanize Java."


In fact this is very true, as I have observed many times. Writing Java applets wasn't unlike what HTML has been with Internet Explorer. There's Java and there's MS-Java, just like there is HTML and MS-HTML. Fortunately, Microsoft couldn't co-opt Java to the point that it has with HTML. Two different things - different enough that the additional development time was always there.

As far as the security issues, there are many known unanswered security vulnerabilities. Serious ones. Not to mention the new ones that have been discovered since then. Six years is a long time. MS-Java is ancient.

This post has been edited by Glenn9999: 20 October 2008 - 09:56 PM

[erpdude8]

I agree with Glenn9999 with MS JavaVM being "inferior". And MS now mentions about a newer MSJVM build 3185 here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/nzdst/archive/2007/1...15-release.aspx

But anyway, Ascii2 should forget about obtaining either MSJVM build 3812 or 3815 as he'll have to pay MS $4k for a custom support contract to get either one as they're not available from MS's hotfix servers. Price info that he was referring to was mentioned here.

Better off using the latest Sun Microsystems Java software which are far more reliable and more stable (and more up to date).

This post has been edited by erpdude8: 04 February 2009 - 11:05 AM